You have done a good job, says one of the survivors of the terror to the defence lawyer.
Cf http://www.dagbladet.no/2012/02/06/nyheter/innenriks/anders_behring_breivik/fengslingsmote/20107916/
I have been thinking, why is “terror” judged so much by words? Why not look at the actions, their actual consequences? Who is killed or wounded? The victims are mainly civilians. In Norway, at Utøya, youth and children.Civilians, women, men and children – these are the typical targets. I have called terrorists “fascists” in a former blog post. Whatever we call them, the victim is clear; civilians and civil society.
This is what terrorists don’t respect – whatever their words. This is what they try to strangle. Everything that is soft, human, vulnerable, trying. This is dangerous and must be eradicated. Society must be “cleansed”. Terrorists use words, to further the deception – it is done for or against capitalism or imperialism, against the wrong religion, and so on. But the real message is in the action itself – the killing of civilians. According to the Norway July 22 2011 terrorist, this deed is even “knightly”.
Besides the actual victims, two key processes are blocked by the typical terrorist actions. The first, most visible, is democracy. A good target in terrorist logic is voters. Another good target is women in public, or schools for girls (e g Afghanistan). The attack on democracy trend is accompanied, more or less visibly, by attacks on women and gender equality. In the Norway case, the terrorist wanted to target two groups, “cultural marxists” and “feminists”, and the misogynistic aspect is fairly clear (e g women described as birth machines).
In a paper written in 2004, called “A theory of gendercide” (see Texts / Publications in English, on the menu above), I discussed the role of sex/gender in the build-up processes of social aggression and war. I compared Nazi Germany, the Balkan wars in the 1990s, and other cases. I found that a trend towards misogyny (hatred of women) and anti-feminism is common, sometimes combined with an idealized “upgraded” role of women in the new state (or reich) created by the aggressors. I also discuss evidence pointing to sexist terror becoming more common, as a component of terror in general.
The Norwegian 2011 terrorist saw himself as knightly, although he did not exactly protect women and children. Terrorists generally appear on the lower end of the power scale in a conflict. They are not up to a meeting man to man, so to speak, they do not have a military able to meet the enemy on a battle front. Instead they operate a bit like thieves, through sneak attacks. This “lower class position” of terror in the hierarchy of forms of warfare, contributes to the anti-civilian, anti-women and anti-children character of typical terrorist attacks, although it is not the only reason for these trends. Terrorism, as a method, as acutely anti-democratic. Democracy is what we do not have time for, faced with terrorism. We must fight or flee. The terrorist act is not an invitation to democratic settlement, but the very antidote to such settlements. It is no wonder, therefore, that terrorism tends to go together with reduction of democracy, and renewed authoritarianism, on all sides.
I learned in school that democracy was a formal thing. It meant elections every four year and so on. This year, I have learned that it is a very real and lively and vulnerable thing. It is not just there, by itself, it is something we must fight for. Today’s “contempt for politicians” resembles the contempt for democracy in the 1930s. “Politicians” are not crooks, but people elected – by us. The enemies of democracy should be brought into the open.
This is hard. It is really hard. It comes to attack me in my dreams.
I thought I was well prepared. But how could someone do this? Not just a bomb, but an hour-long systematic shooting of youth? I haunts me and gives me nightmares. It is worse than even the Nazi death camps.
Here are some pictures, telling more than many words. The first is of prime minister Jens Stoltenberg. present when a woman got a message of grief (copied from media reports July 24).
Tomorrow Norway stops
Norway stands still one minute, the headline says. It was to become more.
The next pictures are from the flower demonstration in Oslo, known as The Rose March, on July 25, where many people participated, perhaps a third of the nearer city centre population. In fact, the centre of Oslo was so full of people that no march type of demonstration could be arranged. Similar scenes had not been seen since the liberation of Norway from the Nazis in 1945.
All kinds of flowers were displayed.
As a participant, I felt that all the people were angry – and yet not about to show revenge!
On the next picture you can see how all kinds of people participated, and on the left, children at the shoulders of their parents. Is it symbolic that the sign in the middle asks for low speed.
Only a third or so of the marchers had the opportunity to actually hear the start speeches for the meeting. The rest walked towards the parliament and the main church of Oslo. I was among them.
This is how the “main strip of Oslo” between the parliament (Storting) and the King’s castle looked
The streets were full of people. We turned towards the main church of Oslo, to honour the dead.
Many had laid their flowers there already, it was hard to get approach, the square was packed with people.
The Arab revolution 2011 is about democracy, dignity and development. This new voice of freedom is constantly silenced and twisted. One way to do it, is to bomb communication links.
The Cafe Argana in Marrakech is not a communication link by itself, but a symbol of communication. It was selected for symbolic terrorist attack Friday April 28. I was there ten days earlier, with my sons. I am very much aggrieved and saddened by this attack. My heart is with those who have lost their loved ones. I am just a Norwegian. I can’t say much for Moroccan culture. But I feel, this is an attack on everything that the new Morocco stands for.
When we were at Cafe Argana, my sons and I enjoyed the view of the great square and used the opportunity to discuss some larger matters, like, what could work, for Morocco, why does it have a fifty percent illiteracy rate, why not more prosperity, being so close to Europe. It could be said that we were at the Cafe with a bit of love for Morocco in our hearts, like many guests. In that view. the killers have killed a piece of Morocco, through us, the Argana clientele .
How dare these bomb-throwing cowards and fascists speak for the people of the Arab world? I am only a foreigner, but as a world citizen, I have to speak my mind. I think that the new fascists must be clearly named and opposed. If initiatives like “the new Morocco” keeps to a democratic agenda, there will be increased progress and increased freedom. The opportunities are there.
For some reason this song part often intrudes when I read recent news on the 2011 Arab revolution – and counter-revolution, e g in Libya, Syria, Yemen and Bahrain. It is from the Doors’ first album (1967), the song The End. The snake is long, seven miles… he is old, his skin is cold, Jim Morrison sings, in one of the dream moments of this apocalyptic song. Perhaps it is no wonder that it creeps up on me, as I read about the counter-revolution, the way tyrants now move into fascist means of controlling their populations, firing with heavy armour, using the military, covert action, snipers and torture.
My heart is with the revolution, the proudness and courage displayed by the democracy protesters, who are forced to become militia, and take up weapons, and their families and friends. Whatever the tyrants do, the democracy activists will be remembered as martyrs for a more democratic, free, developing, prosperous, respectful and dignified Arab world.
I am one of the contributors to the Women’s health days event in Oslo 1-2 April. See
http://www.forskningsradet.no/no/Arrangement/Kvinnehelsedagene_2011/1253964755410
My paper is titled Gender, violence and health – do we need a gender perspective in health and medicine? (in Norwegian, Kjønn, vold og helse – trenger vi et kjønnsperspektiv på helse og medisin?v/Øystein Gullvåg Holter, professor i maskulinitets- og likestillingsforskning, UiO)
The seminar starts Friday 1st of April at 9, Oslo kongressenter, Youngstorget
My introduction, ca 10, will be focused on one example of why a gender perspective is needed – violence against children. New results show that violence against children is mainly performed by the adult who dominates the decision-making in the home.
Gender equal decision making among adults in families lowers the chance of violence against children perhaps as much as two thirds.
This is a major historical research result – in my view, and I will highlight it in my lecture.
The gender equality survey in Norway 2007 showed that children growing up in gender-equal homes, where the parents decided things equally, were less exposed to violence and physical punishment, compared to father- or mother-dominated homes.
This is a major new finding, and I regard it as one of the most important findings of my research, stretching over many years from 1980 to today.
The 2007 representative survey data maps adults retrospective experiences, growing up ca 1940-2000, and seems to be a clear and solid data source, for example, reported in a very similar way by men and women. Compared to violence in adult life relationships, also included in the survey, the data on childhood experiences seems more robust, less prone to “mission shift” or normative reinterpretation, although it is retrospective. If bad memory or rescripting due to age was substantial, we would expect disparate reports from different age groups, but instead, that data gives a coherent picture. The age groups tell of gradually reduced violence, like other sources, and also, they have much the same basis for regarding something as violence, as indicated by e g health correlations. For example, it is not the case, in terms of health outcomes, that violence in childhood reported by the young is any less serious than the violence reported by the old part of the sample. A variety of tests point in the same direction, the childhood gender equality and violence reporting is realistic.
Gender equality in the socialization agency, the family, or the parental group, in this study, reduces the chance of violence against children substantially, almost two thirds. In father-dominated homes, 27 percent experienced violence or punishment, in mother-dominated homes 17 percent, in gender-equal homes 10 percent. The main perpetrator, the violent or punishing person, also mapped in the survey, and in father-dominated homes was mainly the father, in mother-dominated homes mainly the mother, in equal homes more balanced but more often the father.
This main pattern was not much affected by gender, age, education, whether the parents were divorced, or mobbing in the socialization environment. Gender equality emerged as a strong independent factor, regarding violence against children, according to the survey results.
The main result was described in the report, see Holter etc: Gender equality and quality of life, p 239. but it took some time for the message to sink in, and this is a case that deserves better promotion. Further analyses of the survey results have confirmed the independent character of the gender equality decision-making variable. Its strong effect and similar patterning across other known variables, like social class related variables, family breakup, and social problems (mobbing in childhood environment) is remarkable.
These result are of historical importance. They should be better tested and established, can they be repeated in Norway, are they international, do they represent a wide trend? If they turn out to be right, through broader testing, they demand a rethinking, or even a paradigm change, in many disciplines.
In my March 15 blog post on the Japan catastrophe – earthquake, tsunami and nuclear fallout – I commented that the problems are also due to lacking gender equality. What does that mean?
We might start by considering plant eaters and meat eaters (Japanese terms), or soft and strong men (Norwegian terms), democracy and authoritarianism.
Historically, Japan managed to adapt successfully to Western imperialism only by regenerating authoritarian tendencies, leading to the axis power alliance and imperialism in World War II. Lack of attention to gender equality was part of the limited development of democracy in post-war Japan.
Women were not much present, it seems, in Japanese decisions leading to the lacking defence against the three main parts of the catastrophe (earthquake, tsunami, nuclear). The basic issue is not just gender balance, but gender interest balance. It is the reproductive sphere that is hurt, mainly, by the damages in today’s Japan, although production is diminished too. The main victim is civil society and human lives.
Perhaps Japan needs an ideas and behaviours revolution, learning from Egypt and Tunis, extending democracy peacefully? Japan needs to move beyond its authoritarian inheritance and conformism, leading e g to the ignorance of the warnings from outspoken researchers like the seismologist Ishibashi Katsuhiko.
In many countries of the world, new and old roles for men are in opposition, a change behind the scenes. In Japan, it has been called a struggle between “plant eaters” and “meat eaters”, in Norway, a struggle between “soft” and “hard” men. All over the world, there is a need for change, and also, for using tradition, for making use of the stability of culture, but no longer for authority, for democracy instead.
What can we do? Japan is hit by a terrible multiple tragedy, first, the earthquake, then, the tsunami, and now, the possibility of nuclear fallout. I am deeply concerned for the Japanese people. Yesterday, a Japanese student broke down in tears in my course, and asked for a postponement delivering her paper – I said yes, and tried to comfort her.
What I can do, as as a social researcher regarding gender equality, is to ask – what role gender equality, what role women, regarding nuclear and environment safety in Japan? Has this been an all-male affair?`It is fairly well known that men’s risk margins are larger than women’s. There are studies showing that the presence of women improves health, environment and safety in business organisations. I am not saying that gender equality could have avoided the catastrophe, but it could have reduced the impact.
Who is going to bear the costs, of Libya divided? Scenario one, a victorious Arab democratic revolution. Scenario two, some tyrants resisting, mixed picture, civil war. What is the best solution? The first, most of us would think, but how can it be achieved? The young generation “new configuration” of the new Middle East was created by the revolutions in Tunis and Egypt – but even there, each inch of progress is hard-won. In a recent event, pro-democracy protestors in Egypt, demanding their right to overlook the security service, were attacked and beaten. Should the Arab world face this democracy issue alone, or should the rest of the world support them? The answer obviously is yes, this is a global issue. We are not living in fascist times – are we? But then the question is, how to support the democratic struggle, with many divided voices. A debate going on while the democracy fighters of Libya and elsewhere are dying, taking the load for the world community. Unorganized idealists against a fascist thug army. Do we want a repeat of the Spanish civil war?
