Category Archives: opinions

Here we go again…

Posted on by
Reply

So we’re 8 days in, and the new president in the world’s «leading democracy» has started his campaign to make his country great. Or great again, according to his slogan.

It’s true that the USA was one held up as an example to the rest of the free world, but now we seem to be better moving along without them. Or we should use them as a text book example of how NOT to do things.

First, you don’t make any country great by degrading at least half its population as secondary citizens. That goes for both women, LGBTQIA+ and immigrants. You can debate all you want immigrants’ rights to be there, but they are still human beings, and not all the other things Trump is calling them. (And, a friendly reminder that all of your ancestors were once immigrants, but that seems to have slipped your memory.)

As for women, we have the right to control our own bodies, and our own reproductive rights. The conservatives push (and victory in many states) for a total ban on abortions, are not going to eliminate abortions, but instead it will cause thousands of women to die from unsafe abortions and lack of proper healthcare. The same will follow with the re-enactment of the GAG-rule, in other parts of the world. Why is it that American conservative Christians dictate the healthcare given to women, both in their own country, and elsewhere? But we get it, it’s more important to be against abortion at all costs, than taking into consideration that you get blood on your hands through all the unnecessary deaths following from unsafe abortions, refusal of care, or total lack of care due to your policies.

Second, you don’t make a country great by bullying others to obey your petty wishes. I’m sorry, but you have again elected a president that behaves like a spoiled child, and who bullies and intimidates anyone standing in his way. It has nothing to do with the interest of Americans in general, it has to do with his ego.

Third, you don’t make your country great by denying climate change, pulling out of international agreements, and rolling back on the development of green technology and industries. Instead of seeing this as a threat, you should see it as new opportunities and new jobs.

Fourth, you don’t make your country great by removing the pages of the history books that don’t please you and your narrative. You could rather do with an update of your history books, and throw in some real geography at the same time.

Fifth, you don’t make your country great by increasing the social and economic differences. On the contrary, that’s a good recepie for social unrest and violence, but it is perhaps what the president wants? I mean, Marxist equality politics, or as we call it in Scandinavia and Europe, redistribution and well-fare, are really scary stuff! Not sure how we survive on the European side of the Atlantic, with our public funded educational system, public health care and so on.

Sixth, you don’t make your country great, or even make it look great, when your president throws a tantrum each time someone disagrees with him, whether it’s a journalist or a prime minister of another country or someone else. It actually makes it look like you’re run by an idiot.

Your president keeps saying «make America great again», but I don’t know how it’s going to work, both for the above mentioned facts, and then because America was never really that great. You don’t have to dive deep into history, to see all the injustice and bullying the USA has been doing over the years. Both within your own country, and abroad.

The only thing that can make the US great again, is that you elect responsible politicians at all levels, that are more interested in the well-fare of every citizen in your country, and not only interested in clinging to their power and generous pay-checks, actually paid for by the tax payers at the bottom of the hierarchy…

The reason I even bother to write this, is that, unfortunately, the US has too much influence on the global scene, which means US politics actually affects people outside the US. I also feel incredibly sorry for all Americans that didn’t vote for Trump, and I hope you will unite and fight back (with all means except violence!) and that you (and the rest of us) will manage to create a better world in the future.

Why are we so obsessed with other peoples’ choices?

Posted on by
Reply

Why would I poke my nose into someone’s personal choices, like if they want to have children, or not?

Because really, how does it affect me if my friend decides not to have children? As a matter of fact, it doesn’t! If that is what she or he wants, to be without children, it’s their choice. Many seem to think that choosing not to have children is a selfish choice, but isn’t it just as selfish to decide to reproduce your own genes?

More women than men are being questioned about why they decide not to have children, and we have to stop doing that. It’s a personal choice, their choice, and it’s got nothing to do with the rest of us. A woman without children is as much of a woman with children.

Stop saying to young women who say they don’t want kids, things like “Oh, you just wait and see, one day you will come around and want your own children”, or “life will be so empty without children”. Maybe your life will feel empty without (your) children, or maybe you always dreamt of being a parent. But we don’t all share the same dreams.

Even as a mother myself, I’m actually provoked each time I see/hear other women being questioned about why they don’t want children. Why is it that they have to explain or justify that choice? We never ask people to justify their choice of career, do we? So why is it so important to us to know why people, in particular women, chose not to have children?

I don’t have the answer to that question, but what I can say, is that I don’t see why it should be of any interest to me. It might be worth adding that some people really want kids, but they can’t have them, for various reasons. Insisting on asking them about when they are going to start a family or why they haven’t got children yet, is actually very disrespectful, and stir emotions better left alone at social gatherings. It’s not your right to know everything.

With the holiday season coming up, you might find yourself in company of people who has decided to live their lives differently than you. As they will probably never demand an explanation from you as to why you decided to have children, don’t demand an explanation from them either, because frankly speaking, they really don’t owe you one.

My life, my choice ❤
Photo: pixabay.com

International day for the elimination of violence against women

Posted on by
Reply

Today, November 25, is the international day for the elimination of violence against women.

Unfortunately, violence against women is still a major problem. Both domestic violence, and in society at large.

Women are always obliged to think about how to behave and to do risk-management when out in public places. We have long since understood that whatever we say or do, or the way we dress, can be used against us, should we be attacked by a man.

We are obliged to think about safety when we walk alone on the streets at night. Stay alert, footwear to run in, keys in one hand, cell phone in the other. Or we spend money on a taxi, as it’s better to be safe than sorry.

I don’t think men in general have any idea about how many things we women have to think about, just to get home safe at night.

Domestic violence is still a major problem in many countries. And we must not forget that it’s not that long ago that it actually became a criminal offense. For way too long it was seen as a conflict between spouses, belonging to the private sphere, not something to bother the police with. (This is still the case in many countries.)

Fortunately that has changed, but the problem has not disappeared. And it’s still under-reported. Add to that, that not all abuse comes in the form of physical violence. It can just as well be psychological in the form of control over the other person’s choices, and/or threats. This is harder to prove, as there’s no physical evidence (like bruises, broken bones etc.).

In the most severe cases, the violence is fatal, causing the death of thousands of women every year.

Much is done to help women escape domestic abuse, but the best thing would of course be to prevent it from happening in the first place.

We have a long way to go, but part of the solution should be to bring to attention from an early age the misconception that violence is an integrated part of being conceived as masculine. The two have nothing to do with each other.

A real man doesn’t hit his partner. Or his kids, or anyone else for that matter.

A real man doesn’t rape, he makes sure that his (female) friends make it home safe and sound.

In the end, women don’t want to be protected by men, we want protection from the perpetrators, so that we can feel safe no matter where we are, at any time of the day or night.

And don’t forget, as parents, we are responsible for our childrens’ socialization and moral education. Make sure you raise your boys to be good men.

What should we learn from the US elections?

Posted on by
Reply

I will leave to other analysts and journalists to dissect the American elections, and what we might expect from it. I would rather like to reflect a bit on what we on the other side of the Atlantic, who doesn’t like Trump and his counterparts, can do as to not end up in the same mess.

First of all, I think that a big part of the electorate on this side of the Atlantic as well, is fed up with status quo. No matter the politicians we elect, few things seem to change. One of the reasons might be that political parties that used to speak on behalf of the working class, no longer do that. Instead they have moved towards the centre or even to the right, in desperate attempts to win back voters who have moved towards the extremes over the past ten years or more.

One example is the Norwegian Labour party, whose economic politics now are hard to distinguish from the Conservatives. Most people with normal salaries have small benefits of their tax cuts, while the better fortunate end up with larger tax cuts. It doesn’t seem fair for most people.

Rich people makes lots of fuzz about the taxes they have to pay, and several Norwegian millionaires have fled the country in recent years, taking their money with them. My question is, why should the normal working class pay their taxes with a smile, contributing to the common health- and education system, among other things, when the most fortunate ones find every possible loop hole to avoid paying taxes, and then complain about every cent they “so generously” contribute? Until it gets unbearable for them… Poor rich people…

We see the same in other countries, where corporations and rich people seem to have priority over normal people. Politicians are worried about the level of national and international tests comparing the results of their students, while at the same time never allocating enough money to uphold good schools with good teachers. Our kids suffer from lack of resources, both economically and due to lack of staff. Absent teachers are not replaced, causing at times big delays in the courses. Our children are our future, it’s actually not just a fancy slogan. How are they going to proceed if they don’t even get a good basic education?

Who are going to take care of the elder population, if no-one in the end qualifies for medical and nursing studies? Or the next generations, if the quality of the teachers are in free fall? Who would even like to work in the public sector if the salaries are no longer sustainable?

The rich will always manage, as they can afford to send their children to private schools. But what about the rest? This is really the recipe for even bigger socio-economic differences.

The endless hunt for more profits and higher economic growth are going to kill us in more than one way. Moving all production to low-cost countries might have seemed as a good idea at one point, but it also took away lots of jobs, and with that people’s wages. If people don’t earn money, have can they consume anything? Those who really benefitted from this are the owners and shareholders of the multinationals. They are lining their pockets, while their employees barely make a minimum to survive. The rich are getting richer, the poor are getting poorer. And the impression left with the masses, are that most politicians are in the pockets of the multinationals, in one way or another. People don’t care of the BNP is growing, if they can affort less with what they are paid.

There are vital institutions in our societies that should not be run for profit, and health and education are two of them. Since the late 1980’s and the 1990’s, when neo-liberalism really entered the public sector, hospitals are no longer just providing health-care, they are also supposed to make money. We saw some disastrous effects of this during the Covid-19 pandemic. Saturated hospitals, all over the world, resulting in lock-down of the whole world for months. The cost of this, in terms of both lives and money were horrendous. And I’m sure we would have managed better if we had not in all these years before, cut down on the number of hospital beds, and got rid of national stocks of basic medical supplies. In stead, the world as a whole, were dependent on supplies from China. As soon as the supply-chain broke down, because factories were closed and movement strictly restricted, we all got confined in our own homes.

All the applause, and all the big words spoken about health-personnel being on the frontline, with the people working in our supermarkets (one of the few things left open), about how valuable they are to the functioning of society, and still we pay them nickels and dimes. We keep rushing patients through the hospitals, because it’s not cost-effective to keep them there.

Maternity wards in smaller places in Norway are closed, because they are not cost-effective. And that is in one of the richest countries in the world. At the same time, Norwegian women are encouraged to have more children! Where’s the logic?

Universities have much suffered from the same changes in financing. It’s more important to push through a bigger number of students, than to assure good quality. The students comes under more pressure, at the same time as their financing is not keeping up with living-costs. The more they have to work in addition to being full-time students, the less time they actually have to prepare their courses. Less time to prepare, worse results.

If politicians see higher levels of education in the population as a means to counter future challenges, they should act on it, not just talk.

Because, as we all know, we have a lot of challenges ahead of us, with an ageing population and climate changes. Instead of giving us plenty of bullshit about how we are going to save the world if we recycle our waste at home and drive electric cars, they should put more pressure on the real big polluters to clean up their mess. I don’t say that we as individuals should not do anything, but what you and I do alone is not going to make much of a difference. When we say that we all need to pull together here, it actually includes the big corporations, who are reluctant to do major investments in cleaner technology, because it means less profit for them.

And cleaning up in our own neighbourhood is not enough. It changes nothing if European factories pollute less, if in the end it means that there are even more factories in Asia polluting even more. All because we have become addicted to our high consumption. We want a lot of stuff, and we want it cheap, cheaper and cheapest. And why do we want the cheapest? Because our salaries are getting less worth every year. Indirectly we are told by our governments that we are less valuable than the multinationals with their focus on constant economic growth. It’s more important to keep the rich both rich and happy, than to ensure a decent living-standard for the majority.

If you are serious about saving the planet, make sure that people can actually afford to care about the planet. Because when they can barely manage to make ends meet, it’s more tempting to vote for someone who promise them more value for the money, than anything else. For them, what do they care happens to the planet in ten to twenty years, when they are not able to put food on the table for their kids today?

Our politicians have to realise at some point, that we demand action on behalf of the normal and poor people now, not the rich and super-rich. That we, the average people, don’t care about the shareholders of multinationals, because they have enough money already to support themselves in this life, and probably the next twenty as well. We are fed up of being down-prioritised, of being neglected or fed fancy slogans that in the end means nothing at all.

Extreme-right wing parties say they stand with “the normal” people, which is why they are coming to power in several countries. I don’t buy their rhetoric, though, and I certainly don’t like their views on immigrants and other minorities. But lots of people do, and this should have been a wake-up call long ago for other politicians more moderate, both left and right, but specially to the left.

Those who used to represent the working class, have instead turned into an elite, that moves further and further away from their original base.

When they, and the moderate parties at the centre and right, start to put people over profit, the voters might come back. I advise that they give it a shot before it’s too late, and we find ourselves under the rule of neo-fascism all over Europe.

Act of “kindness” or simple misogyny?

Posted on by
Reply

I recently heard of a female professional, who had been removed from the decision making process on a project without her knowledge. She was removed, without being consulted, because her older, male colleague “knew she was busy with her baby”.

Excuse me, but what could he possibly know about her needs, unless he spoke with her first? I know that for some women, becoming a mum takes up all their time, and all they want to do is taking care of their baby. For others, going back to work is a free choice, something they really want and need, not just for the money, but for their own sake. They want, and need, to continue a life where they are not “mum” all the time. And unless they are asking for a reduced workload, who is to decide what is best for them?

Maybe this male professor thought he was being nice, but the truth is, he wasn’t. He was infantilizing his younger, female colleague, deciding in his own mind what was best for her. This is a very old fashioned way of thinking about professional life and motherhood at best, misogynistic at worst.

I have met men who thinks that women should be the primary caretaker of the children, and of the home. Well, I still haven’t seen any scientific proof that says that women are, by nature, better caretakers than men. It’s all about how we are raised, and the so-called values that society pass on from one generation to the next.

When I ask these men why women should be the primary caretaker regarding children, they don’t manage to present me with a good answer. It’s more like “it’s the way it is”, or “it’s the way it’s always been”.

Well, they might be right in the way that it’s been like this for a long time, but who decided in the first place that this should be the norm? Women have been working since the beginning, in the fields, in the mills, in the guest houses, later in the factories, the schools, the hospitals, and in the offices. In addition, most of them are also the main responsible for the childcare and housework. Yes, it’s a big burden to carry.

But instead of a man making decisions, once again, about what women need or want, they should ask themselves how both parties can have a career and a family life, without one getting burned out, or one having to cut down on work to manage family logistics.

It might come as a surprise to some men, but many women would also like to advance in their career, without sacrificing having a family, or without having to employ someone else to take care of their children and house.

There’s a lot of talk about the importance of the mother’s presence in the early years of a child’s life, but equally important is the presence of the father. Children need several role figures in their lives, they need to see that gender is not what defines a persons ability to take care of them. When we keep reproducing the old fashioned stereotype that women should be home with the children, while the father is working, things will never change.

As different families have different needs at different times in life, I do favour free choice. But what concerns me, is that most of the time, this “free choice” results in women reducing their work time, or quitting all together, while the man continues like nothing has changed. (Having children is a true gamechanger!) Or he might even have to work more to compensate for the increased expenses coming with having children.

Which brings me to another point, the fact that men are systematically better paid than women. If you can’t afford childcare, and one parent has to stay home with the kids, who’s it gonna be? The one that earns less is the obvious choice. You don’t need to go to Harvard or Oxford to get that.

But why is it that women is systematically less paid? Is it another old fashioned thought behind? Stemming from the days pay was related to physical strength? And then continued when women started to work in offices, but only unmarried women were employable? Because they were forced to quit when they married, as from then on their responsibilities would be to care for their husband, their children and their home. Unmarried women back then usually lived with their parents, and like that less expenses, justifying less pay.

Also of importance is the way work-life is organised. You don’t get kids to put them in other peoples care from 7 in the morning till 7-8 in the evening. That means you never really see your kids awake. The less flexible working hours, the less people can make free choices when organising their private life. The Nordic countries have done a lot to accommodate work-life to family life, while most other countries still require that family life is adapted to work-life. Which in reality gives a lot of people little choice on how to manage their family life.

Still, when both parents manage to hold a job, and juggle as best they can, how arrogant is it for a male colleague to decide that his female colleague should be excluded from important aspects of their common project? She didn’t make any mistakes, didn’t complain about her work-load, she didn’t miss any deadlines. In my opinion his decision can’t be explained rationally, or justified. I worry for every woman returning to work after having a baby, because they risk being cut loose simply because “they are busy with a baby”. I have read stories about women coming back to work after giving birth, to find that their job is not really existing any more. Which is a cruel way to exclude them from the work-place.

This “a woman’s true place is in the home”-mentality has to change. Not just for the sake of women, but also for the sake of men. All the things they miss out on, because they have to work, work and work. And so much talent is wasted because women are pushed out of work-life.

We need both women and men in the work-place, as well as at home. Male executives, STOP making decisions over our heads, we are totally capable of taking care of ourselves, and we are damned good at logistics. Instead, work with us to change old fashioned mindsets and outdated structures in public policies and work-place policies. Men will benefit from it as much as women. Trust me.

Bombs don’t make peace

Posted on by
Reply

We see it again and again, world leaders thinking, for some obscure reason, that bombs can make peace. Well, they don’t!

Did Putin get what he wanted when he launched his “quick invasion” of Ukraine? No! Instead the war is still dragging on, two and a half years later. Do Putin really think that he’s going to enter the history books as the leader who managed to restore the Russian empire? No, he’s going to to be listed as a man abusing his power, a leader crushing down all opposition among his fellow countrymen and -women, one who ignore human rights and who prosecute LGBTQIA+ people and whomever speaks against him. A leader that waged war on a neighbouring country without provocation.

In addition, Putin is every so often threatening to use nuclear weapons. What would happen if he do? It will only escalate the conflict further, and a peace treaty will no longer be possible. The retaliations against Russia would be severe. And again, he will certainly not appear in the history books as a great leader, but the one crazy man that pressed the red button.

Do the Israeli government lead by prime minister Nethanyahu create peace with their invasion of Gaza? And more resent their invasion and bombing of South Lebanon? Do Nethanyahu and his cabinet think that by killing tens of thousands of civilians in Gaza and Lebanon, in their hunt for Hamas, that they will obtain any kind of peace and security for the Israeli people any time soon? NO! All they do is escalating the conflict.

I strongly condemn the Hamas attack on Israel October 7, 2023, their killings and taking of hostages. I also strongly condemn the continuous attack on Gaza by the Israelis.

The only thing they are going to achieve by this war on the Palestinians, is creating more hate, more Palestinians turning against them, willing to sacrifice themselves for a free Palestine.

The Israelis continue to bomb hospitals and schools where people has taken up refuge, because their homes are destroyed, the refuge camps are not safe, in their hunt for Hamas. So far more than 41 500 Palestinians have died, the great majority civilians. In comparison, the Israeli has lost 1 706 people. I don’t like to compare numbers like this, but it shows the efficiency of the Israeli army compared to their opponent.

Now the situation is getting even more dangerous, as Iran is about to be involved as well. We are on the verge of a full scale war in the Middle-East, a war that is only going to create more hatred and conflict, and no peace.

The Israeli government, led by Nethanyahu, has given the green light for more illegal settlements. They are still pushing on Palestinian land, imposing restrictions on their movements, blocking supplies. And this was before the war started. What do they think they will accomplish? That the Palestinians would surrender and say, OK, you win, we move? As long as Israeli politics are formed and carried out in a way that threatens the existence of the Palestinian state, Israel will never be safe either. How hard is that to understand?

With all this said about the Israeli response to the October 7 attacks by Hamas, I don’t understand what the latter thought they would obtain either, except for severe retaliations by the Israelis. Did they think that Israel would “surrender” after the attack? What on earth were they thinking? In one way, we might say that it was Hamas that brought all the destructions on Gaza, on it’s own people. They knew for sure that Israel would react. How could they not? If my neighbour starts shooting at me, am I not forced to protect myself? How come Hamas launched this attack, fully aware of the possible retaliations? Hamas also knew that the population of Gaza has literally nowhere to go, nowhere where it’s safe. It is pure cowardice to use women and children as shields. The Palestinians suffered enough as it was, for Hamas to bring this war on them by their actions. Again, acts of war don’t make peace.

Unfortunately, as long as there are people on either side that has no interest in a peaceful solution, the situation will never be solved. We all thought peace between Palestine and Israel would become a reality after the signing of the Oslo Agreement in 1993 and the Oslo Agreement II in 1995. It was supposed to be a first step towards a peaceful co-existence between Palestine and Israel. There were people on both sides that were not happy with the outlines in these agreements, but negotiations were supposed to carry on. When the Likud party (Israel) won the elections in 1996, the agreement was put aside, and negotiations halted.

Since then the situation has become more severe, until this last devastating escalation. Peace has never been further away. I don’t know how the situation can be solved, neither in the Middle-East or in Ukraine, but one thing is for sure, bombs don’t make peace.

Image by Banksy

Equality has yet to arrive…

Posted on by
Reply

Despite what many people think, we are far from gender equality. Neither in the professional domain, or in the domestic. Women are still paid less than men. Sectors predominantly female, are less valued, and thus less paid, than male dominated sectors. Even after the Covid-pandemic, when the whole world was cheering for the nurses, little has happened to their working conditions and their pay check. Likewise when we speak about school/education. All politicians are very concerned about the level of their country’s students in international tests like the PISA, wanting to be the best, but when discussing the pay and working conditions of the teachers, it’s hard to find the money.

Our children’s education is what is going to get them jobs and income in the future, so why is it so hard to give a decent pay to the people whose responsibility it is to provide this education? Is it because it is predominantly women working in the (public) schools up to a certain level?

But it’s not just in public sector that there’s a gap between the genders in pay. It happens all over, also in the private sector and in the movie business to add a couple of examples. So no, equality at the workplace has not arrived.

The same is true when it comes to domestic life. Women still take on much more of the domestic chores and logistics, than the men, even when both parties are working full time.

As I mentioned in one of my previous posts, girls are still raised different than boys, in the respect of taking care of a household. And the women are punished much harder than men if things are not “up to standard” at home, being it cleanliness, homemade food, following up on birthdays and other anniversaries (both family and friends, and children’s friends).

Women are expected to drop whatever they are doing for the needs of anyone else. Children need attention? Mum is coming. Children need help with homework? One moment, darling, I’ll come help you. Child sick and home from school? Mum is usually the ones who stays home from work. Elderly family members need assistance? Be there as fast as I can.

This constant disruption of own activities, and work, is something women just accept. Like there is no alternative. And this constant rupture also influences women’s careers and pay check in the long run. Or, if they are really focused on juggling both family and career, they are often sacrificing almost everything else, like taking care of their own health, going out with friends, or just read a book on the sofa (a book that has nothing to do with work or childcare, but simply for entertainment).

Most mums I know are up and about, taking care of their family’s needs no matter their own condition. We pop an Advil, and get on with business as usual, because we are expected to do so.

Alright, the occasional Scandinavian reader might protest a bit. But don’t you forget that you’re in the lead. Here in France, things are rather different. Even if we have free childcare from 3 years (pre-school, not kindergarten), the children don’t go to school on Wednesdays. Or they finish at 12am that day. Meaning that parents have to organise one way or another; leisure clubs, grandparents or one parent stay at home every Wednesday. And guess who that usually is? It’s mum, of course.

Who is usually running to pick up their kids from after-school activities before it closes at 6.30 pm? Mum. Meaning that she has to adjust her work to fit the logistics of the family. Usually under the pretext that the husband is earning more, so again, no equality.

In other words: Women work for less pay in the workplace, they take more of the burden at home, and they run like Forrest Gump every day to be in the right place at the right time, and at the end of the day, they are punished economically for doing less professional work than the men, and so they have less pension. If all the “invisible” chores done by women every day were to count as workhours during a week, our pension would look very different.

If parents start to educate their children at home in the same manner, regardless of gender, I hope for a better future for both women and men. Because men are absolutely capable of doing the same tasks at home as the women they live with. Just like a woman can be an astronaut, a man can be a caretaker. A woman can use a screwdriver and an electric drill, just as a man can mop a floor and change diapers. If we raise our children to be independent in more ways than the economic sense, and encourage them to use a wider range of their capabilities, including their caretaking cababilities, equality between genders will arrive at a much faster pace.

Let us get rid of the stereotypes that says that a man should be the main breadwinner of the household, and the woman the primary caretaker, and instead create a better symbiosis between the genders.

I will write about that symbiosis in the near future. In the meantime, I hope you enjoyed reading, whether you agree or not. It’s possible to leave a comment on the subject J

Some relations are more difficult than others…

Posted on by
Reply

I have read many places that therapists often advice people to avoid toxic relations. An advice I have no problem understanding, and wanting to live by. The challenge is just that sometimes we are forced to keep those relations in one way or another, because it’s people within our closest circle.

After conversations with several friends, over time, I have realized that one relation many of us feel difficult, is the one with our mother-in-law. And a recent question from one of my friends, “why do you think it’s so difficult?” inspired me to write this little piece.

First of all, I have no definite answer to the question. Second, many people have excellent relations with their in-laws. But for those of us who experience some kind of troubled relation, it seems that there are some things in common.

One thought that has crossed my mind, is that mothers-in-law are jealous of their son’s spouse. It’s not a far out thought, because she has loved her son since he was born, and all of a sudden there’s another woman claiming his attention and love. Which sparks another question; will she ever find the woman he choose good enough for her son? Or will she actively look for faults? Although she will probably do this “in secret”.

One common thing my friends and I have experienced, is the mother-in-law who interferes in our way of raising our children, or who comes around and straight away start to do things around our house. It’s nothing more irritating than this kind of silent way of criticism. Because unless we asked them to come over to give us a hand with the housekeeping, we do take it as criticism when the first thing they do are starting to pick up toys from the floor, or arranging all the kids books neatly in the shelves, or ask if they should take the dirty laundry with them. Perhaps they think they do us a favour, perhaps they do not intent to provoke us, but a tired mum with toddlers might perceive this behaviour in a hostile manner.

Which brings me to yet another thought. I have had to face on quite a few occasions comments like “you look tired”, or “you look irritated”, or “are you not well” when my kids were still at the age when they woke up at night, or when I had a rough time managing two-under-two alone, while my husband was away at work. I can assure you that comments like that is the last thing you need when you feel totally exhausted, but still tried to fresh up a bit to look kind of representable, and took your children to see their grand-mother. First time I let it pass, second time I bit my tongue, third time it really started to piss me off, and if I do remember correctly, I think I finally asked her to stop her comments. I guess she didn’t take it too well, because younger people should not answer back to the elder. Because mothers-in-law often put themselves in a superior position, even if we no longer share household or have to answer to her on a daily basis.

I also think that mothers-in-law keep a close eye to how we treat their sons. If we live up to the standard she sets. A standard I guess few of us are able to meet.

In case of conflict between a son and a mother, I also think that the wife will often be accused of turning son against mother. Perhaps not in direct words, but never forget that daughters-in-law are women too, and our intuition is no worse than that of the mothers-in-law. We quickly sense that something’s going on. No words need to be said, we see the look, feel the cold, sense the tone.

Of course the nature of the relation is also depending on the personalities involved. It’s why this is not something that affects every mother/daughter-in-law relation, or it affects it in different degrees. But at worst, it can be really tricky.

Perhaps things are about to change, as new generations have different experiences than old ones with balancing work and family. The next generations of mothers-in-law (like my friends and myself) have more than a formal higher education, we have also lived a life of our own before settling down, unlike our own mothers and mothers-in-law, whom for the most part left their parents’ house to go live with their husbands. And most likely not very far from both their own family and their in-laws. But living in close proximity or not, in our western society, the core family is the valued standard. We no longer depend on the extended family as we did before. We prefer most of the time to manage on our own, we have our own ideas about how to raise our children, and how to manage our daily lives. We read books and articles on child development and education (perhaps too many?), and we openly disagrees with the older generation about child raising. And not the least, even when we try to avoid conflicts, we don’t accept whatever comes from the other end. Modern women set their boundaries, which is not always well perceived. We don’t hang around simply to please everybody else, we have learned to say “no”, and for some this is a bitter pill to swallow, simply because what they deem best, or what they want, is not always what we want.

This might also have to do with how previous generations interacted, with the eldest having more authority. Now that they have reached the top of the hierarchy, they think it’s their prerogative to decide for everybody in the family. And I think that with the elevated level of education for both men and women, this is posing a problem, as we want to do it our way. We are no longer asking “how high” when asked to jump, we rather ask “why?”  

I have to end this by saying that I’m the mother of two boys, and one day in the future I might be the mother-in-law. I’m pretty sure I’m not going to be a perfect mother-in-law, but I do sincerely hope that I will have the sense to ask before just assuming what my sons and their partners need, and not go about doing what I think they need or want. My aim is to treat them as equals, not inferior, non-experienced people. If they ask for advice, I will give advice, otherwise I shall do my best to keep my mouth shut. Being who I am, I know that can prove difficult at times, but as I said, I’m no more perfect than anyone else… I still hope I can have a good relation with my sons and their partners, based on openness and mutual respect.

We need to talk about…. FGM – Female Genital Mutilation

Posted on by
Reply

We need to talk about…. FGM – Female Genital Mutilation

I know, it’s not a pleasant topic to raise, but as a matter of fact, more than 3 million girls are at risk of being subject to FGM every year. More than 200 million girls and women alive today have already undergone some form of FGM.

The practice is mostly practiced in the western, eastern and north-eastern regions of Africa, and in some countries in Asia and the Middle-East (a total of 30 countries).

Contrary to what many probably think, FGM is a cultural practice, not a religious one. No religious scrips prescribe this practice. What is a fact is that it is a way to control girls, women and their sexuality. It is grounded in deep-rooted inequality between the sexes, and represents the most extreme form of discrimination of women and girls.

Depending on the type of FGM (there are 4 types), the female genitals are mutilated/damaged to various degrees for non-medical reasons, which in most cases leads to various health problems, and of course pain during sexual intercourse.

The procedure has both immediate complications and long-term complications, ranging from severe pain, excessive bleeding, problems urinating, painful menstruations (difficulty in passing menstrual blood), scar tissue and complications during childbirth. The procedure can also lead to psychological problems, like depression and post-traumatic stress disorder.

What is also disturbing is that some women find out that they have been subject to FGM as adults, having no recollection of it happening. The practice is usually carried out on young girls between infancy and adolescence (up to 15 years), while most are most likely carried out when the girl is between 2 and 4 years, or between 7 and 12 years old.

Most of the FGM is performed by traditional practitioners, under unhygienic conditions, with non-sterile instruments (knives, razorblades). In recent times, more health care providers are performing FGM, about 52 million per year, due to the belief that it is safer when medicalized. Despite the fact that it might reduce the risk of immediate severe infections, the procedure is still the same, and just as harmful for the girl.

Internationally the practice of FGM is recognized as a violation of the human rights of girls and women, a person’s right to health, security and physical integrity, as well as the right to be free from torture, and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment. It also violated the right to life, as the procedure in some cases end by death of the girl.

WHO has been working for a long time to support a holistic health sector response to FGM prevention and care. WHO also collects evidence to improve the understanding of FGM, to better develop means to end this harmful practice.

With more than 200 million girls and women who already have undergone FGM, and another 3 million girls at risk every year, this is a global problem.

In European countries, health care staff are trained to discover already performed FGM, and to inform parents that the practice is illegal in Europe. They risk both heavy fines and jail time if they subject their daughters to FGM. Health care personnel can also inform other juridical instances if they suspect the parents will bring their daughter(s) to their country of origin to perform FGM, so they will be prevented to leave Europe with their child(ren).

European countries also offer post-FGM support to women, like reconstructive surgery, pre-natal follow up, C-section, psychological therapy, among other things.

The international day against FGM is 6 February. Let’s hope that one day this day can rather be The international day of the death of the practice of FGM.

You can read more here (including an overview of the 4 types of FGM):

https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/female-genital-mutilation

Some thoughts about clothes….

Posted on by
Reply

I love clothes. I’m not talking about the latest fashion, or designer clothes, just ordinary stuff that is available for normal people like me. And why do I like clothes that much? Because it’s so funny to play with them! You can express how you feel, whom you want to be, whether you want to be the peacock, or rather just blend in. You can create different “personalities” depending on your mood. You can go rock, classic, chic, romantic, western style… you name it.  

But more than that, I love styling clothes. Not like what you see on the catwalk, or in the fancy magazine photo shoots, but you know, just adding that little extra. The things that make the difference between putting on clothes, and actually wearing them. Those little things that makes your outfit personal. It can be different kinds of jewellery, a nice belt, a handbag, the shoes or boots you chose. A scarf, or a hat perhaps.

I have no need to be the peacock in the park, but I do like a bit of colour as it boosts the energy. Except those days when I fall back into black, as was the only colour I wore for years as a student. It’s something about it, just popping back to those days from time to time. But it needs some edge, because I don’t like to feel entirely invisible…

I don’t care much about the latest fashion (as a matter of fact I can be extremely slow to pick up on things, if I pick it up at all), I just care about feeling good in what I’m wearing.

I get inspired by people I see on the street, or on Instagram, that have a relaxed but edgy style. Then I figure out how to adapt it to make it my style. In my opinion there’s a difference between inspiration and copying, and I make an effort not to do the last.

It might sound as I spend a lot of time thinking about clothes; what to wear, what to buy, how to wear it. Well, I don’t really… It’s just that I enjoy feeling well about myself when I get out of the house, or when I catch a glimpse of myself in the mirror. Wearing colours and feeling well, gives me a boost. While on a bad day, when I pull out the first pair of pants and the first sweater, it drains my energy to even see myself in the mirror. Changing that grey sweater for an orange one might not totally save the day, but it certainly lifts the spirit a bit.

Dressing well gives others a nice impression of you, but most importantly, it gives you a nice impression of yourself too! Bottom line is, I dress for my own pleasure, not anyone else’s.

So even if you don’t care about dressing up for other people, dress up for yourself! When you feel good, you get into a better mood, and you feel more confident about yourself. Why miss out on that?

Feel free to share your opinions on the subject 🙂