In Sweden today there is a discussion going on about same sex marriages. The government has suggested a new law that will force the church to web homosexual couples. Some priest have protested saying they will leave their jobs if they are forced to wed homosexuals in their churches. Other priests would not mind to wed homosexual couples. The Christian Democrat Party in Sweden (KD) has suggested that the state, through city councils, should legally wed all couples and that the couples that wants the church´s blessing can go and have an additional ceremony afterwards. At the moment, both the church and the state can web heterosexual couples. Homosexual couples can through city councils gain partnership that has the same rights and legal effects as a marriage.
Traditionally, many Swedes like to get married in church. This is usually not due to their Christian faith but because it is tradition to marry in church and because it is a beautiful place to get married in.
The question now is if it is every Swede´s right to be able to get married in church or can the church exclude people they don´t feel follow the Christian tradition? Politicians argue that everyone should have the same rights and that what the church is doing is discrimination. The church on the other hand argues that it is not up to the government to decide for the church what they should do. The government has nothing to do with the church, since the church is now separated from the government. Why should the government then decide that the priest should have to do something they feel is wrong according to their faith?
It would be very interesting to hear what you think about this and how can be compared to Italy. I understand Italy is very influenced by the Catholic Church. Is the government trying to decide over the church or is it the church that tries to influence the government? Have you discussed same sex marriages in Italy? I don´t think the Catholic Church would ever accept that. How would Italians in general argue in those matters? Please let me know what you think and how you feel about this proposal for a law in Sweden!
I got the impression that Sweden is a head of time when it comes to discussions around same sex marriages. (compared to some countries) My own opinion is that you should not force people to go against their faith. Why should a priest have to perform something that goes against his believes. I think the question and the matter of same sex marriages must be given time to be able to change. I do not think using force is the answer it has never been seen as a successful tool. Because It is a sensitive question and it has strong connection to what has been thought of as a sinful act it must be given time.
But correct me if I am wrong was there not a broadcast of a homosexual priest in the Swedish church a few of month ago?
In the question about Catholic Church I am not certain they should be less accepting then our protestant Church is, it might feel so for us Swedes because we are Protestants and the Catholic Church seems so different. The Catholic Church has more rituals such as the holy water, the communion is a bit more formal (I don’t know how to express that but I think you understand what I mean).
I found some interesting links for those who want to read more. Especially the last link about the gay church was interesting.
I'm Sara and I'm going to write about gender equality in Sweden.
(There isn't a post up yet for this topic, so I decided to post it here in the meantime so I won't miss the deadline.)
Comparatively, Sweden is considered to be one of the most gender equal countries in the world. Fair parental leave legislation is one of the things that have made Sweden famous and turned the country into a role-model.
But when you start to dig a little deeper, it turns out that Sweden hasn't come all that far after all. There are still many problems to be dealth with, such as wage gaps between men and women, violence against women, and gender bias in the labour market. For example, women are less likely to be hired than men, and women have far less access to top positions within companies. This has been a known issue for years, and still very little action has been taken to change it.
However, things are definitely moving in the right direction. The Government are continously taking steps to fight inequality. For example, in 2005, the Prohibition of Discrimination act was changed and does now include gender to the list of grounds on which discrimination is banned. It could be argued that the most important change is the fact that general awareness around gender issues is growing. People are thinking more about gender related patterns in society and they are starting to question these patterns to a wider extent.
Is it realistic to think that gender equality can be fully achieved, or is there always going to be an underlying, inherent attitude that women should settle for less?
In Italy, same sex marriages are not allowed. There were a lot of discussions about the possibility to legalize civil weddings for homosexual couples, but it was not possible because of the strong influence of the Catholic Church.
Nowadays, if two homosexuals want to get married, they have to go to Spain or another country where same sex marriages are allowed.
We think that people must be free to marry also a person of the same sex. The goverment should guarantee this right. On the other hand, the church is based on principles that are opposed to same sex marriages. Also if we think that some of these principles are wrong, they must be respected. People that want to get married in church have to believe and respect these principles. In our opinion it is wrong to get married in church only because it is a beautiful place to get married in. The church refuses to marry homosexual couples as it does with divorced people according with its principles. In conclusion, we think that the government should let people choose their partner without the infuence of the religion, but at the same time everybody must respect religioous beliefs, so the government can't force the church to go agaist its principles.
Hi Viktualia, we would like to write something about Italian situation about same-sex marriages. In the last few years thousands there have been lots of demonstrations in support of same-sex unions but nothing has changed and nothing is going to change and neither civil union nor same-sex marriages are recognised under Italian law. The Pope has dismissed gay marriage, saying it was a serious mistake to obfuscate the value and functions of the legitimate family based on marriage by attributing legal recognition to other forms of legal union for which there is no real social demand and he was supported by Italy's right-wing and part of left-wing. Most part of Italian people seems to agree to recognize rights for unwed couples of the same or the opposite sex but marriage is still considered in his traditional sense. This point of view is strongly encouraged by Chatolic Church and most of Italian politicians and unfortunately this situation is not going to change.
I think that this essay is dealing with a very important issue in today's Europe.
It is a very controversial issue, so I do think that everyone has to choose a standpoint: with the religious associations or with the gay community. Personally, I don't think there is any middle course.
Is the question of same sex marriages about the wedding rights of priests or about the human rights of gay couples being accepted as a part of our community?
A very interesting discussion on same sex marriages and the validity of these marriages has taken place in California. I recommend a visit to the websites of both camps:
In response to Maria: Hi, I fully agree with you in most of your opinions. Why does the state have to force the priests to do something that is against their believing and their lives? Can’t homosexuals get married someplace else, or does it have to be in church? Many marriages between man and woman are held in the town hall, the city hall or someplace else. Can’t that be a good alternative for homosexuals? Then they can get married and the priests can do their jobs! :) /Kerstin
In response to Sara: What an interesting subject you have chosen! It’s like a never-ending struggle this about gender equality. I agree with you that a lot has changed over time, and we might say that Sweden has come far. About the fair parental leave legislation, I’m not too sure I think it’s good enough yet, though. I hope that we can split the parental leave equal some day, even though I don’t think the time is right yet. Some people say that you cannot force fathers to paternity leave, but I’ve never heard anybody talking about whether you can force mothers to maternity leave or not.
I’m positive that gender equality can be achieved, but it makes me tired when I hear people say that there already is a gender equal society in Sweden. They simply don’t see the differences between the values that are given to boys and girls or men and women. I think it’s important to give some thoughts to why men are normative. A good example for that is the little girl who plays with cars. Some people might call her a tomboy, and there is nothing wrong with that. (We’ve had cars for less than one hundred years, so we can exclude the possibility that boys play with cars due to biological reasons, however.) But if we turn the example the other way – a boy that plays with dolls? What is he then? A ‘girlboy’? There isn’t even a word for it! And if we produce one, like a ‘girlboy’, it gets a negative connotation, doesn’t it? Nobody wants a feminine boy, or?
Did you hear about the doctor who was driving his son to football practice? On their way to practice they crashed into another car, and the doctor was so badly injured that he died immediately. The son seemed unhurt, but was taken to the hospital anyway. As the boy was brought into the emergency room, the doctor that was supposed to examine him exclaimed: “But it’s my son!” (Hedlin 2006:114). How that was possible is not too easy to answer for everybody, I think.
I hope I get to read your essay when it’s finished!
I think the discussion is about the rights of both priests and gay couples. The priests shouldn't be forced to do something they think is wrong. They have rights just like the homosexual couples. That is why it is a complicated issue.
The council could wed homosexual couples and priests that want to give their blessings, could do that in a ceremony afterwards. It just seems wrong to force someone to do something they feel is wrong. Don't you think?
You are right, noone should be forced to do something which goes against their moral belief. But I don't think that the religious argument should hinder the introduction of same sex marriages either.
There are many life style views in different churches. Many priests from the area where I grew up, Göteborg, are against women being priests. They were never allowed to dominate the debate.
This questions is perhaps also linked to the separation of church and state. As a final step we could introduce a new form of civil marriage, for both heterosexuals and homosexuals, as the legally binding act. This is the case in most countries where the church has been decoupled from the state.
As you say, a balanced solution taking into consideration both views would of course be the best.
it is true that the Italian government is deeply influenced by the Catholic Church, and that's why there is a total lack of legislation about same sex marriages and, more in general, about de facto couples rights and obligations. In fact, the Catholic Church doesn't recognize the validity of such kinds of relationship since they go against its canon.
In our opinion, if a homosexual couple wants to realize its love dream, why should we deny them this right? Marriage is a civil agreement between two people that gives right and obligations towards each other; this contract doesn't take in account the sex of "contractors". This has nothing to do with religion, since it's simply something recognized by law. In Italy there are lots of gay and de facto couples that wish to have the same rights as "ordinary" married ones, but probably they never will get them (at least till the Catholic Church influence will be so strong).
We don't believe that forcing priests to marry homosexual people is a good thing: it's a form of violence against them since it doesn't respect their faith and their beliefs. Sweden churches maybe are wonderful places to get married, but this shouldn't be the reason to marry there :)
In respons to Viktualia Hi, I’m Anna and I can not give you any opinion about Italy’s point of view as I also study at Mittuniversitetet. But I can give you my thoughts about it and I think that even if the church is separated from the government I still think they have the right to work against discrimination. It was not so long ago since some of the priest in the Swedish church threatened to leave their jobs if it was made possible for women to work as priest as well. I’m not a believer in the way that I go to church or believe in God the father almighty, but I think that if there is a God like the one the church describe, he wouldn’t have anything against love between to adults? They don’t cause any harm to anyone. Maybe its not right to force any priest to marry anyone but I don’t think a priest that cant see love as something good should work as a priest at all. So yes I think its important for the government to make sure that nobody is treated differently because of their sex, skin colour or their choice of love.
Hi Viktualia, I find the issue in Sweden at the moment relating to same sex marriage quite an interesting one but I don't really understand why the government refuses to accept a split between the civil ceremony and the religious ceremony. In many European countries this system works very well. In Belgium for instance you have your civil ceremony at the town hall and then the church ceremony (if you want one) later on in church but homosexual couples cannot marry in church although there have been cases of priests offering blessings to their union.
Splitting the official marriage from the religious ceremony makes a clear division between church and state, which is surely a good thing. The Belgians and Dutch have both had homosexual marriage for many years as a result of this split. Belgium is a predominately Roman Catholic country but homosexual unions were a non-issue precisely due to this system. Another issue is whether people should be marrying in church if they have no strong religious belief in the institution in the first place. There is no fundamental human right to be allowed to marry in church, a religious ceremony is what it is and should not be trivialised simply on the grounds of "romance" or the "pretty surroundings" or any of the other nonsensical reasons people give for marrying in church as opposed to a civil ceremony when they have no religious faith of any kind. Personally, I think the suggestion by the KD is an excellent one. My brother and his (male) partner are planning on marrying in Belgium and they are very happy to go to the town hall to do so, they are both practising Roman catholics and go to church every Sunday and also attend matins and vespers every day at the local monastery, their priest in their parish has accepted them as they are but would not in conscience be able to marry them, which they would also not expect from him.
Why would the Swedish government force people to act against their conscience purely in the name of equality? This is not an issue of homophobia or discrimination against homosexuality and to consider it as such is taking political correctness to the extreme. If anything the entire issue is trying to discriminate against people with strong religious views who believe in matrimony being a specific legal union instituted by god between a man and a woman. Marriage has very little to do with love and romance it is about procreation and is a legal contract. The modern obsession with love and being in love in relation to marriage is one of the main causes of the extraordinarily high divorce rate.
The entire argument put forward in relation to 'discrimination' is illogical in my view as homosexual partners can already enter into a perfectly acceptable civil partnership, is this argument not rather discrimination and oppression of the minority of people with strong religious views who wish to adhere to the teachings of their churches, whether or not Christian?
Having said that I have just read that celebrants would not be forced to marry homosexual partners and would be given the freedom to refuse if they so wish which if this goes through is quite as it should be. The issue of women priests is another interesting one and as a woman myself I do not see any reason why women had to make such a fuss about becoming priests, I again see this purely as a way of encroaching on centuries of tradition and in areas where they had no right to demand anything all in the name of modernisation and 'equality' which is quite laughable in my opinion. Women are as strong and as equal as they feel they are and it has nothing to do with external 'rights' in relation to the priesthood or any other occupation for that matter.
Hi Sara, Just to respond to your post about gender equality. In my own situation it is completely inapplicable. I earn three times as much as my husband and am a company director of three companies. My mother, grandmother and great-grandmother were all strong independent women, even though my great-grandmother was a Victorian and became a single mother of three during the first war she worked and earned her living all her life, my grandmother did the same and was also a single mother in the forties and fifties and the manager of three industrial laundrettes with a huge turnover and later owned and managed her own business, my mother also ran her own business and worked all her life even though a mother of eight.
As a result of my upbringing with these three women, whom I lived with until they died, I have come to the conclusion that equality is entirely relative, a question of attitude and predominately in the mind. I find it quite insulting for people to make judgements regarding equality in terms of financial earnings, is money the be all and end all of everything? Life is much more than your bank balance. The obsession with 'equality of the sexes' has resulted in many men being unsure of their position in society and I have noticed that Swedish men in particular have great difficulties in dealing with complicated and high maintenance Swedish women who seem constantly to demand and very rarely give. The issue of domestic violence is again a rather sensitive one in my view. Women always make a big deal of this but men who are subject to domestic violence (which is not uncommon by any means) have very few outlets to make this known and are more likely to be stigmatised and shamed by acknowledging they are victims of domestic violence. Violence against women, the abuse of women and forced prostitution of women always hits the headlines, why is this? The same, not infrequent, cases in relation to men are ignored, why would that be? Could it be because women prefer to be shown in the light of a victim? Does the obsession with the oppression of women not precisely give women a sense of power over men? It was an interesting phenomenon when I was at university as an undergraduate in the early nineties that there was a direct correlation amongst my friends that the more strident a feminist, the more 'girly' they were in conversations with men and the more they insisted on men opening doors for them, paying for dinner, etc. The less feminist of us, and I have to admit this includes me, were much less concerned with the gender of the people we were consorting with and less inclined to treat men as something other than ordinary human beings. The net result of feminism has not been to increase equality but rather to widen the gap and understanding between the genders. Strong women have always been able to find a position in the world and history is cluttered with great women. I feel women should get over themselves and stop making nebulous comparisons to men and wondering how oppressed they are and just get on with it.
First of all I want to clarify that I'm writing this essay purely from an argumentative point of view. I, like you, have grown up surrounded by strong and independent women and have never perceived myself to be an oppressed victim of gender discrimination.
However, for the purpose of this essay I am trying to see things from a different point of view, and in doing so, I've found a few things in Swedish society that I find it hard to ignore.
For example, you say that you earn three times as much as your husband. Of course there are women in top positions, but it's not as easy for women to get to these positions as it is for men. Also, if your husband had the same position as you, he is statistically more likely to earn more despite doing the exact same job and having the same level of education and experience. I don't know about you, but I don't think that's fair.
Of course money isn't everything, but it's one of the aspects in society where the differences between genders are the most obvious. You say you find it insulting for people to make judgements regarding equality i terms of financial earnings. Well, I would find it quite insulting if I went to my boss and politely asked to be given the same salary as my male co-worker who has the same level of education and experience as me, and he said "Oh, come on, who cares? Life is much more than your bank balance!"
I do agree that everything is relative and that it would serve us all well to sit back and humbly reflect on how well off we are, compared to the rest of the world. However, I don't believe for a second that just because there are other places in the world where the conditions are worse, we should throw in the towel and say "well, other people have it far worse, and it makes the struggle for my own rights seem trivial, so I'm just going to give up and leave it as it is". What kind of ridiculous martyr attitude is that?
One important thing to remember is that the struggle for gender equality is not just focused on women. Gender stereotypes are just as condescending and inhibiting for men and women, both genders are frequently being discriminated against, and, like you say, some issues relating to men are given virtually no attention in the media whatsoever.
As with any other issue, some people tend to get over-zealous and come off as self-righteous. That is never a becoming attitude and it's one of the fastest way to scare other people off from getting involved or learning more about the issue at hand.
On the other hand, some people go too far on the other end of the scale, rolling their eyes at the whole thing, saying that everything is fine and that women should "get over themselves". Personally, I think that argument is a lazy cop-out.
Society should be fair and equal for all people, regardless of gender. This is not the case in Swedish society today, and that needs to change.
I agree with you when you say that no one should have to do something that is against his or hers beliefs, but when it comes to something as getting married in a church (which a lot of people wants to do), everyone who wants to do so should have the right to. Your sexual disposition shouldn't exclude you from having a church wedding. I think it's awful that homosexuals doesn't even have the right to get married in a lot of countries, it's very discriminating. By not letting them get married in the same way as straight people do, they're deprived something that is a very basic thing for most people.
To respond to Paulina's comment. Why should anyone who wants to get married in church have the automatic right to do so? Just because you want something does not make it an unalienable right. There is no human right to getting married in church. The logic that if you want to do so you should be allowed to seems rather disturbing as that would open up all kinds of possible arguments. I killed that person because I wanted to and it is my right to do as I want. I abused that child because I wanted to and it is my right to do as I want.
Another issue is that the definiton of matrimony and marriage is the union of man and woman as husband and wife. So why would same sex couples want that as it is clearly not applicable to their situation? It would be like heterosexuals wanting to be called homosexual because otherwise it is discrimination against them, it makes absolutely no sense.
Finally if it is a right to demand to do as you want then surely it is also your right as a priest or a religious person NOT to act against your conscience or is there no such thing as freedom of religion in Sweden?
"The Vatican has said it opposes a European Union proposal for a United Nations declaration formally condemning discrimination against homosexuals, which it claims would "de-criminalise" same sex unions. "
And why Vatican opposes? Because "outlawing discrimination by means of a UN declaration meant that states which did not recognise same sex marriages would come under pressure to do so."
From now on, who is catholic (and therefore supports Catholic Church) is a personal enemy of mine. This gang of bloody mobsters is very happy that homosexual people can be still killed nowadays. If you don't condemn discrimination, there is only one way left: to persecute. And now I'm sure that they would kill people if only they had the same power and freedom that Islams have in those countries.
(I'm sorry for the anger, but yes, I'm very angry. I see everyday good friends of mine that are homosexual and feel that day after day a new Fascist regime is coming.)
21 comments:
Same Sex Marriages
In Sweden today there is a discussion going on about same sex marriages. The government has suggested a new law that will force the church to web homosexual couples. Some priest have protested saying they will leave their jobs if they are forced to wed homosexuals in their churches. Other priests would not mind to wed homosexual couples. The Christian Democrat Party in Sweden (KD) has suggested that the state, through city councils, should legally wed all couples and that the couples that wants the church´s blessing can go and have an additional ceremony afterwards. At the moment, both the church and the state can web heterosexual couples. Homosexual couples can through city councils gain partnership that has the same rights and legal effects as a marriage.
Traditionally, many Swedes like to get married in church. This is usually not due to their Christian faith but because it is tradition to marry in church and because it is a beautiful place to get married in.
The question now is if it is every Swede´s right to be able to get married in church or can the church exclude people they don´t feel follow the Christian tradition? Politicians argue that everyone should have the same rights and that what the church is doing is discrimination. The church on the other hand argues that it is not up to the government to decide for the church what they should do. The government has nothing to do with the church, since the church is now separated from the government. Why should the government then decide that the priest should have to do something they feel is wrong according to their faith?
It would be very interesting to hear what you think about this and how can be compared to Italy. I understand Italy is very influenced by the Catholic Church.
Is the government trying to decide over the church or is it the church that tries to influence the government? Have you discussed same sex marriages in Italy? I don´t think the Catholic Church would ever accept that. How would Italians in general argue in those matters? Please let me know what you think and how you feel about this proposal for a law in Sweden!
Many thanks
Sofi Linde
I got the impression that Sweden is a head of time when it comes to discussions around same sex marriages. (compared to some countries)
My own opinion is that you should not force people to go against their faith. Why should a priest have to perform something that goes against his believes. I think the question and the matter of same sex marriages must be given time to be able to change. I do not think using force is the answer it has never been seen as a successful tool. Because It is a sensitive question and it has strong connection to what has been thought of as a sinful act it must be given time.
But correct me if I am wrong was there not a broadcast of a homosexual priest in the Swedish church a few of month ago?
In the question about Catholic Church I am not certain they should be less accepting then our protestant Church is, it might feel so for us Swedes because we are Protestants and the Catholic Church seems so different. The Catholic Church has more rituals such as the holy water, the communion is a bit more formal (I don’t know how to express that but I think you understand what I mean).
I found some interesting links for those who want to read more.
Especially the last link about the gay church was interesting.
http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_rom.htm
http://www.trosch.org/for/gay-lesbian.html
http://www.gaychurch.org/
Hi,
I'm Sara and I'm going to write about gender equality in Sweden.
(There isn't a post up yet for this topic, so I decided to post it here in the meantime so I won't miss the deadline.)
Comparatively, Sweden is considered to be one of the most gender equal countries in the world. Fair parental leave legislation is one of the things that have made Sweden famous and turned the country into a role-model.
But when you start to dig a little deeper, it turns out that Sweden hasn't come all that far after all. There are still many problems to be dealth with, such as wage gaps between men and women, violence against women, and gender bias in the labour market. For example, women are less likely to be hired than men, and women have far less access to top positions within companies. This has been a known issue for years, and still very little action has been taken to change it.
However, things are definitely moving in the right direction. The Government are continously taking steps to fight inequality. For example, in 2005, the Prohibition of Discrimination act was changed and does now include gender to the list of grounds on which discrimination is banned.
It could be argued that the most important change is the fact that general awareness around gender issues is growing. People are thinking more about gender related patterns in society and they are starting to question these patterns to a wider extent.
Is it realistic to think that gender equality can be fully achieved, or is there always going to be an underlying, inherent attitude that women should settle for less?
In response to Viktualia,
In Italy, same sex marriages are not allowed. There were a lot of discussions about the possibility to legalize civil weddings for homosexual couples, but it was not possible because of the strong influence of the Catholic Church.
Nowadays, if two homosexuals want to get married, they have to go to Spain or another country where same sex marriages are allowed.
We think that people must be free to marry also a person of the same sex. The goverment should guarantee this right. On the other hand, the church is based on principles that are opposed to same sex marriages. Also if we think that some of these principles are wrong, they must be respected. People that want to get married in church have to believe and respect these principles. In our opinion it is wrong to get married in church only because it is a beautiful place to get married in.
The church refuses to marry homosexual couples as it does with divorced people according with its principles.
In conclusion, we think that the government should let people choose their partner without the infuence of the religion, but at the same time everybody must respect religioous beliefs, so the government can't force the church to go agaist its principles.
Maria e Cristina
In response to Viktualia
Hi Viktualia, we would like to write something about Italian situation about same-sex marriages.
In the last few years thousands there have been lots of demonstrations in support of same-sex unions but nothing has changed and nothing is going to change and neither civil union nor same-sex marriages are recognised under Italian law.
The Pope has dismissed gay marriage, saying it was a serious mistake to obfuscate the value and functions of the legitimate family based on marriage by attributing legal recognition to other forms of legal union for which there is no real social demand and he was supported by Italy's right-wing and part of left-wing. Most part of Italian people seems to agree to recognize rights for unwed couples of the same or the opposite sex but marriage is still considered in his traditional sense.
This point of view is strongly encouraged by Chatolic Church and most of Italian politicians and unfortunately this situation is not going to change.
Linda e Marinella
Hi Viktualia and everyone else,
I think that this essay is dealing with a very important issue in today's Europe.
It is a very controversial issue, so I do think that everyone has to choose a standpoint: with the religious associations or with the gay community. Personally, I don't think there is any middle course.
Is the question of same sex marriages about the wedding rights of priests or about the human rights of gay couples being accepted as a part of our community?
A very interesting discussion on same sex marriages and the validity of these marriages has taken place in California. I recommend a visit to the websites of both camps:
http://www.protectmarriage.com/
http://www.noonprop8.com/
Bye for now!
Stefan
In response to Maria:
Hi,
I fully agree with you in most of your opinions. Why does the state have to force the priests to do something that is against their believing and their lives? Can’t homosexuals get married someplace else, or does it have to be in church? Many marriages between man and woman are held in the town hall, the city hall or someplace else. Can’t that be a good alternative for homosexuals? Then they can get married and the priests can do their jobs! :) /Kerstin
In response to Sara:
What an interesting subject you have chosen! It’s like a never-ending struggle this about gender equality. I agree with you that a lot has changed over time, and we might say that Sweden has come far. About the fair parental leave legislation, I’m not too sure I think it’s good enough yet, though. I hope that we can split the parental leave equal some day, even though I don’t think the time is right yet. Some people say that you cannot force fathers to paternity leave, but I’ve never heard anybody talking about whether you can force mothers to maternity leave or not.
I’m positive that gender equality can be achieved, but it makes me tired when I hear people say that there already is a gender equal society in Sweden. They simply don’t see the differences between the values that are given to boys and girls or men and women. I think it’s important to give some thoughts to why men are normative. A good example for that is the little girl who plays with cars. Some people might call her a tomboy, and there is nothing wrong with that. (We’ve had cars for less than one hundred years, so we can exclude the possibility that boys play with cars due to biological reasons, however.) But if we turn the example the other way – a boy that plays with dolls? What is he then? A ‘girlboy’? There isn’t even a word for it! And if we produce one, like a ‘girlboy’, it gets a negative connotation, doesn’t it? Nobody wants a feminine boy, or?
Did you hear about the doctor who was driving his son to football practice? On their way to practice they crashed into another car, and the doctor was so badly injured that he died immediately. The son seemed unhurt, but was taken to the hospital anyway. As the boy was brought into the emergency room, the doctor that was supposed to examine him exclaimed: “But it’s my son!” (Hedlin 2006:114). How that was possible is not too easy to answer for everybody, I think.
I hope I get to read your essay when it’s finished!
Camilla Edvall
In response to Stefan
I think the discussion is about the rights of both priests and gay couples. The priests shouldn't be forced to do something they think is wrong. They have rights just like the homosexual couples. That is why it is a complicated issue.
The council could wed homosexual couples and priests that want to give their blessings, could do that in a ceremony afterwards. It just seems wrong to force someone to do something they feel is wrong. Don't you think?
In response to Kerstin (Kerka)
I agree with you:)
Thanks for the links and comments everyone!
In response to Viktualia
Hello!
You are right, noone should be forced to do something which goes against their moral belief. But I don't think that the religious argument should hinder the introduction of same sex marriages either.
There are many life style views in different churches. Many priests from the area where I grew up, Göteborg, are against women being priests. They were never allowed to dominate the debate.
This questions is perhaps also linked to the separation of church and state. As a final step we could introduce a new form of civil marriage, for both heterosexuals and homosexuals, as the legally binding act. This is the case in most countries where the church has been decoupled from the state.
As you say, a balanced solution taking into consideration both views would of course be the best.
Bye for now!
Stefan
Hi everybody!
In response to Viktualia,
it is true that the Italian government is deeply influenced by the Catholic Church,
and that's why there is a total lack of legislation about same sex marriages and, more in general,
about de facto couples rights and obligations. In fact, the Catholic Church doesn't recognize the
validity of such kinds of relationship since they go against its canon.
In our opinion, if a homosexual couple wants to realize its love dream, why should we deny them this right?
Marriage is a civil agreement between two people that gives right and obligations towards each other;
this contract doesn't take in account the sex of "contractors". This has nothing to do with religion,
since it's simply something recognized by law.
In Italy there are lots of gay and de facto couples that wish to have the same rights as
"ordinary" married ones, but probably they never will get them
(at least till the Catholic Church influence will be so strong).
We don't believe that forcing priests to marry homosexual people is a good thing: it's a
form of violence against them since it doesn't respect their faith and their beliefs.
Sweden churches maybe are wonderful places to get married, but this shouldn't be
the reason to marry there :)
Anna and Giuseppe
In respons to Viktualia
Hi, I’m Anna and I can not give you any opinion about Italy’s point of view as I also study at Mittuniversitetet. But I can give you my thoughts about it and I think that even if the church is separated from the government I still think they have the right to work against discrimination. It was not so long ago since some of the priest in the Swedish church threatened to leave their jobs if it was made possible for women to work as priest as well. I’m not a believer in the way that I go to church or believe in God the father almighty, but I think that if there is a God like the one the church describe, he wouldn’t have anything against love between to adults? They don’t cause any harm to anyone. Maybe its not right to force any priest to marry anyone but I don’t think a priest that cant see love as something good should work as a priest at all. So yes I think its important for the government to make sure that nobody is treated differently because of their sex, skin colour or their choice of love.
Hi Viktualia,
I find the issue in Sweden at the moment relating to same sex marriage quite an interesting one but I don't really understand why the government refuses to accept a split between the civil ceremony and the religious ceremony. In many European countries this system works very well. In Belgium for instance you have your civil ceremony at the town hall and then the church ceremony (if you want one) later on in church but homosexual couples cannot marry in church although there have been cases of priests offering blessings to their union.
Splitting the official marriage from the religious ceremony makes a clear division between church and state, which is surely a good thing. The Belgians and Dutch have both had homosexual marriage for many years as a result of this split. Belgium is a predominately Roman Catholic country but homosexual unions were a non-issue precisely due to this system. Another issue is whether people should be marrying in church if they have no strong religious belief in the institution in the first place. There is no fundamental human right to be allowed to marry in church, a religious ceremony is what it is and should not be trivialised simply on the grounds of "romance" or the "pretty surroundings" or any of the other nonsensical reasons people give for marrying in church as opposed to a civil ceremony when they have no religious faith of any kind.
Personally, I think the suggestion by the KD is an excellent one.
My brother and his (male) partner are planning on marrying in Belgium and they are very happy to go to the town hall to do so, they are both practising Roman catholics and go to church every Sunday and also attend matins and vespers every day at the local monastery, their priest in their parish has accepted them as they are but would not in conscience be able to marry them, which they would also not expect from him.
Why would the Swedish government force people to act against their conscience purely in the name of equality? This is not an issue of homophobia or discrimination against homosexuality and to consider it as such is taking political correctness to the extreme. If anything the entire issue is trying to discriminate against people with strong religious views who believe in matrimony being a specific legal union instituted by god between a man and a woman. Marriage has very little to do with love and romance it is about procreation and is a legal contract. The modern obsession with love and being in love in relation to marriage is one of the main causes of the extraordinarily high divorce rate.
The entire argument put forward in relation to 'discrimination' is illogical in my view as homosexual partners can already enter into a perfectly acceptable civil partnership, is this argument not rather discrimination and oppression of the minority of people with strong religious views who wish to adhere to the teachings of their churches, whether or not Christian?
Having said that I have just read that celebrants would not be forced to marry homosexual partners and would be given the freedom to refuse if they so wish which if this goes through is quite as it should be. The issue of women priests is another interesting one and as a woman myself I do not see any reason why women had to make such a fuss about becoming priests, I again see this purely as a way of encroaching on centuries of tradition and in areas where they had no right to demand anything all in the name of modernisation and 'equality' which is quite laughable in my opinion. Women are as strong and as equal as they feel they are and it has nothing to do with external 'rights' in relation to the priesthood or any other occupation for that matter.
Greta
Hi Sara,
Just to respond to your post about gender equality. In my own situation it is completely inapplicable. I earn three times as much as my husband and am a company director of three companies. My mother, grandmother and great-grandmother were all strong independent women, even though my great-grandmother was a Victorian and became a single mother of three during the first war she worked and earned her living all her life, my grandmother did the same and was also a single mother in the forties and fifties and the manager of three industrial laundrettes with a huge turnover and later owned and managed her own business, my mother also ran her own business and worked all her life even though a mother of eight.
As a result of my upbringing with these three women, whom I lived with until they died, I have come to the conclusion that equality is entirely relative, a question of attitude and predominately in the mind. I find it quite insulting for people to make judgements regarding equality in terms of financial earnings, is money the be all and end all of everything? Life is much more than your bank balance.
The obsession with 'equality of the sexes' has resulted in many men being unsure of their position in society and I have noticed that Swedish men in particular have great difficulties in dealing with complicated and high maintenance Swedish women who seem constantly to demand and very rarely give.
The issue of domestic violence is again a rather sensitive one in my view. Women always make a big deal of this but men who are subject to domestic violence (which is not uncommon by any means) have very few outlets to make this known and are more likely to be stigmatised and shamed by acknowledging they are victims of domestic violence.
Violence against women, the abuse of women and forced prostitution of women always hits the headlines, why is this? The same, not infrequent, cases in relation to men are ignored, why would that be? Could it be because women prefer to be shown in the light of a victim?
Does the obsession with the oppression of women not precisely give women a sense of power over men?
It was an interesting phenomenon when I was at university as an undergraduate in the early nineties that there was a direct correlation amongst my friends that the more strident a feminist, the more 'girly' they were in conversations with men and the more they insisted on men opening doors for them, paying for dinner, etc. The less feminist of us, and I have to admit this includes me, were much less concerned with the gender of the people we were consorting with and less inclined to treat men as something other than ordinary human beings.
The net result of feminism has not been to increase equality but rather to widen the gap and understanding between the genders. Strong women have always been able to find a position in the world and history is cluttered with great women.
I feel women should get over themselves and stop making nebulous comparisons to men and wondering how oppressed they are and just get on with it.
Greta
In response to Greta:
Thank you for your reply!
First of all I want to clarify that I'm writing this essay purely from an argumentative point of view. I, like you, have grown up surrounded by strong and independent women and have never perceived myself to be an oppressed victim of gender discrimination.
However, for the purpose of this essay I am trying to see things from a different point of view, and in doing so, I've found a few things in Swedish society that I find it hard to ignore.
For example, you say that you earn three times as much as your husband. Of course there are women in top positions, but it's not as easy for women to get to these positions as it is for men. Also, if your husband had the same position as you, he is statistically more likely to earn more despite doing the exact same job and having the same level of education and experience. I don't know about you, but I don't think that's fair.
Of course money isn't everything, but it's one of the aspects in society where the differences between genders are the most obvious. You say you find it insulting for people to make judgements regarding equality i terms of financial earnings. Well, I would find it quite insulting if I went to my boss and politely asked to be given the same salary as my male co-worker who has the same level of education and experience as me, and he said "Oh, come on, who cares? Life is much more than your bank balance!"
I do agree that everything is relative and that it would serve us all well to sit back and humbly reflect on how well off we are, compared to the rest of the world. However, I don't believe for a second that just because there are other places in the world where the conditions are worse, we should throw in the towel and say "well, other people have it far worse, and it makes the struggle for my own rights seem trivial, so I'm just going to give up and leave it as it is". What kind of ridiculous martyr attitude is that?
One important thing to remember is that the struggle for gender equality is not just focused on women. Gender stereotypes are just as condescending and inhibiting for men and women, both genders are frequently being discriminated against, and, like you say, some issues relating to men are given virtually no attention in the media whatsoever.
As with any other issue, some people tend to get over-zealous and come off as self-righteous. That is never a becoming attitude and it's one of the fastest way to scare other people off from getting involved or learning more about the issue at hand.
On the other hand, some people go too far on the other end of the scale, rolling their eyes at the whole thing, saying that everything is fine and that women should "get over themselves". Personally, I think that argument is a lazy cop-out.
Society should be fair and equal for all people, regardless of gender. This is not the case in Swedish society today, and that needs to change.
In response to Kerka:
I agree with you when you say that no one should have to do something that is against his or hers beliefs, but when it comes to something as getting married in a church (which a lot of people wants to do), everyone who wants to do so should have the right to. Your sexual disposition shouldn't exclude you from having a church wedding. I think it's awful that homosexuals doesn't even have the right to get married in a lot of countries, it's very discriminating. By not letting them get married in the same way as straight people do, they're deprived something that is a very basic thing for most people.
To respond to Paulina's comment. Why should anyone who wants to get married in church have the automatic right to do so? Just because you want something does not make it an unalienable right. There is no human right to getting married in church. The logic that if you want to do so you should be allowed to seems rather disturbing as that would open up all kinds of possible arguments. I killed that person because I wanted to and it is my right to do as I want. I abused that child because I wanted to and it is my right to do as I want.
Another issue is that the definiton of matrimony and marriage is the union of man and woman as husband and wife. So why would same sex couples want that as it is clearly not applicable to their situation? It would be like heterosexuals wanting to be called homosexual because otherwise it is discrimination against them, it makes absolutely no sense.
Finally if it is a right to demand to do as you want then surely it is also your right as a priest or a religious person NOT to act against your conscience or is there no such thing as freedom of religion in Sweden?
G.
This was the last drop:
Vatican opposes de-criminalising same sex unions
"The Vatican has said it opposes a European Union proposal for a United Nations declaration formally condemning discrimination against homosexuals, which it claims would "de-criminalise" same sex unions. "
And why Vatican opposes? Because "outlawing discrimination by means of a UN declaration meant that states which did not recognise same sex marriages would come under pressure to do so."
From now on, who is catholic (and therefore supports Catholic Church) is a personal enemy of mine. This gang of bloody mobsters is very happy that homosexual people can be still killed nowadays.
If you don't condemn discrimination, there is only one way left: to persecute. And now I'm sure that they would kill people if only they had the same power and freedom that Islams have in those countries.
(I'm sorry for the anger, but yes, I'm very angry. I see everyday good friends of mine that are homosexual and feel that day after day a new Fascist regime is coming.)
Post a Comment