Afghanistan, now what?

It’s been six weeks since Taliban took Kabul, in a swipe that surprised everybody, including American intelligence. The international soldiers, diplomats and others rushed out of the country. Yes, I know, President Biden had said that American troops would withdraw from Afghanistan within September 1st. But the plan, I assume, was not to hand the country over to Taliban.

Well, that is what happened, and now I wonder what will happen next. We do have some indications already. Women have disappeared from the streets, and those who are to be seen have put back the burqa. Female police officers are killed by the Taliban. Single women are forced to give up custody of the children to their in-laws. Women-only households are at even higher risk of being forced into marriage with Taliban soldiers. In many places girls’ schools are already closed, women are denied showing up at their workplace.

Activists, journalists and former soldiers are hunted down. The Taliban goes door-to-door to find them, and those who can hide or flee.

The UN estimates that 500 000 people will flee to the neighbouring countries before the end of the year. Worst case scenario they call it. I am, frankly speaking, surprised the estimation is not much higher. We are talking about a population of 38 million people.

The UN also says that 14 million people are at risk of starving to death. Normal people don’t have money. A lot have lost their jobs. The World Bank and International Monetary Fund has frozen the aid that has been flowing into the country for years. The World Bank states this is because they are worried about Taliban’s treatment of women. But who do they think a lack in health services and food shortage will harm first and foremost?

The army, the police force and all other people trained by the NATO troops, fled at the sight of Taliban troops. Was their training that bad? Or their moral that low?

The elected president and his government fled as well while they had the chance. Did they think that NATO would be present indefinitely to protect them? I ask, because I suspect that they were more interested in enriching themselves than actually govern and rebuilding the country.

I am worried about the situation, especially the situation for all the Afghan women and children. At least during the last 20 years, the literacy rate went up. A lot of girls got an education. Now it seems for nothing.

After hunting down Taliban and Osama bin Laden (who turned out to be hiding in Pakistan), there was a lot of shifting motives to keep NATO present in Afghanistan. Building a democracy, building schools, working for women’s rights, and the previously mentioned training of police and army.

I never felt it very honest, the reasons to stay on. At the same time, it seemed better for the Afghan population to keep the Taliban at bay. At least, the day all the troops left, we got the truth; the Americans didn’t stay on in Afghanistan for 20 years to rebuild the country or fight for human rights and women’s rights. They stayed “to keep America safe”.

Now, it seems to me that the world gives a damn about what is going to happen next. Statements like “we are worried about the situation” doesn’t seem very reassuring. I fear that as soon as the cameras are off and the journalists have left the room, world leaders let Afghanistan fall to the bottom of the to-do list.

Several of the articles listed here are used as sources.—bistandsfrys–stenger-jenteskoler/



What has become tiresome lately, is the limitation which is set on movement during daytime. In addition to curfew at 7 pm every evening, we are not allowed to move more than10 km from home… The longing for the mountains, and for a hike somewhere not too crowded with people, is getting stronger every day. Hopefully we have only one week left now, and then…..  

Mercantour, Alpes-Maritimes, France

In the meantime, while waiting for this to come true, I do my best to take pleasure from our nearby surroundings.

When walking the same paths every day, I try to pay attention to the details, as a way to “change the scenery”. And now in spring, there’s always new things to see 🙂

“The most important is to have fun!”

I would like to write a few words about women that inspires me. Actually, it’s quite a few of them, so I won’t write about all of them at the same time. They represent everything from politicians to actresses, from intellectuals to explorers. They are young, or not so young. They are my contemporaries, or long deceased. But they all stand out, in their own way. Some of them you might know already, others perhaps not. They represent a great variety of women, because we are all different, and we chose different paths in life.

Today, I want to present Cecilie Skog, who has climbed Mount Everest and K2, and a lot of other mountains. If that wasn’t enough, she has reach the South Pole, the North Pole and crossed Greenland several times on skis.

The more I read about Cecilie, the more I like her philosophy. It has never been important to her to be the first, or the fastest or the toughest. The important thing is to enjoy doing it! It’s about the value you put in doing it. She puts it this way: “I don’t go out there (on an expedition) to hurry home”.

cecilie skog - Google-søk | Beauty, Women, People
Cecilie Skog. Picture from Pinterest

Cecilie Skog inspires me, not because I dream about climbing summits more than 8000 meters high, or put my skis for a trip across Antarctica. She inspires me because she had the courage to follow her dreams.

After getting her degree as a nurse, she worked six months in a hospital, before she felt an urge “to get fresh air”. She took some weeks leave, went to the mountains, and decided it was outdoor she preferred to be. I admire her courage to change plans. To leave a safe job and to find a new path.

Now as a mother, she has kind of changed path again. The need to climb the highest mountains is gone, the urge to cross the ice is gone. It’s replaced by a drive to introduce her children to all the pleasures nature can give you. It’s the quality of time spent outdoors that count, not how many kilometres you walked or how high you climbed.

I think it is important to be reminded from time to time, that it’s quality, not quantity that counts. Especially when it comes to everyday life.

International Women’s Day

As always, there are things to celebrate, and still battles to fight when it comes to women’s rights.

Let’s start with some good news:

Argentina changed its abortion laws in 2020, ending a total prohibition on abortion. Several other countries have also changed their abortion laws in recent years, like Ireland, Australia and New Zealand.

In Kenya, 40 clan elders have decided to stop child marriages and to end female genital mutilation and other forms of gender-based violence. This is important, and progress is made in other countries as well.

In many African countries, education on women’s reproductive health, family planning and access to modern contraceptives are on the rise. This in turn will reduce the number of (unsafe) abortions, and allows the women to take control over their own bodies and their own reproductive health.

Further, more than 100 nations reignite the vision of the Beijing Platform for Action, the most comprehensive roadmap for advancing gender equality.

Emmanuelle Charpentier and Jennifer A. Doudna were awarded the Nobel’s Price in chemistry. Kamala Harris was appointed the first female vice-president in the USA, and Gitanjali Rao was selected TIME Magazine first ever “Kid-of-the-year”, for her use of science and technology to promote social change. And I tell you, what a girl this is!

But despite progress, there are still battles to fight.

Honour killings, in particular a threat to girls and women, are still a widespread problem especially in South-Asia and the Middle-East. As of late, an Indian 17-year old girl was beheaded by her own father after he discovered she had a relationship with a man.

In India, as in Pakistan and Afghanistan and several other countries, women are often married off to the man who raped her. This is a horrific practice, and something that needs to end immediately.

In Poland, a country at the heart of Europe, and member of the European Union (EU), abortion is now prohibited. The law passed in parliament in 2020, despite large protests.

Abortion is also prohibited in the following European countries: Malta (also member of EU), Andorra, the Vatican and San Marino. A complete overview of the situation worldwide can be found here.

Both access to healthcare and education are under pressure during the covid-19 pandemic, and we have to make an effort so we don’t take many steps backwards now that progress has been made in many countries.

But even in western societies we now see family life returning to old stereotypes, where women take on a greater toll of housework, whether they are still working during the pandemic or not, compared to their spouses. We have to make sure that the years of 2020 and 2021 will not be the new norm, but still work for equality both in the domestic and professional areas.

We need to work to put an end to the misconception that girls and women are the property of men, unable to act on their own. Girls and women are individuals, fully capable of making their own decisions. No girl should be raised solely to be married off and being treated as a slave of the household and a birthmachine. This is why it’s so important to make sure they are given access to education.

We also have to work to improve the balance of representation of power, both in parliaments, but also in business corporations. Even in developed countries, men earn more, they own more, and they more often climb “to the top”. We have to get rid of the stereotype that men are better at making money, while women are better at taking care of the family. Men can be good caretakers, and women can certainly be good leaders.

I would like to end with a quote of Barack Obama, even if it would have been more appropriate for the day to quote a woman. Still, this one sums up the way forward pretty well.

“You may live in the world as it is, but you can still work to create the world as it should be.”

So let’s do that! In the spirit of all the women that has fought battles before us, and for all those coming after us.

Speak up, take action – and have a great day!

International Women's Day web banner illustration of woman hands holding each other in female symbol shape. Girl teamwork concept, modern flat cartoon outline arms.

It’s women’s right to make safe choises

We’re still in the middle of the pandemic, and most of us are probably more concerned about what we can do or not do these days, than we are concerned about things not directly related to our lives. I’m no exception, really, but in the end all I can do is live day by day and make the best of it.
But even if we are not so concerned about people far away these days, or concerned about other topics than the pandemic, things do happen around the world every day.

One of those things are unsafe abortions. Each year there’s an estimated 25 million unsafe abortions. That’s 68 493 abortions per day. 68 493 women and girls risking their lives.

As a matter of fact, unsafe abortions is one of the top five reasons why pregnant women die. And things haven’t become any better during the covid-pandemic. Estimates adds another 3 million unsafe abortions to the already high number, thereby adding several thousand women risking their lives because of an unwanted pregnancy.

The official number of girls and women who die from unsafe abortions is approximately 22 000 each year, but the number is probably larger. 7 million get complications after going through an unsafe abortion, many of these complications have severe impact on the women for the rest of their lives, and many will never be able to conceive again.

In the year of 2018, Doctors without Borders/Médecins sans Frontières treated 24 000 women for complications after unsafe abortions.

But what is an unsafe abortion? It is defined as an abortion without qualified, medical assistance, and/or in unhygienic and unsafe surroundings.

Some of the means used to end the pregnancies are herbs meant to provoke the body to reject the foetus, long and sharp objects, and chemicals injected into vagina to kill the foetus.

Why do women put themselves through this?

There’s no simple answer to be given, but most women seeking unsafe abortions are poor women. This should come as no surprise. Poor women do not have the means to seek professional help, or to go somewhere where abortion is legal and safe, if they live in a country where abortion is illegal. Neither are they given crucial and educative information about alternatives, family planning and prevention. As a consequence these women go through more unwanted pregnancies, and therefore more unsafe abortions.

In countries guided by strict religious legislation regarding abortion, but where abortion is still legal, many doctors refuse to perform abortions as they find it morally unacceptable.

In some countries, like El Salvador, abortion is illegal by law, even if the mother’s life is in danger. Women are given prison sentences, up to 50 years, if they are caught having had an abortion. Even if they lose their baby involuntarily after complications during the pregnancy, they risk several years in prison.

Another reason, is that professional medical aid is simply not available. In many countries, health clinics and hospitals are far away from where the women live, and when they do have access to them, the facilities are poorly structured. Having a safe abortion might seem impossible.

There is also the question of financing. Each time there’s a republican president elected in the USA, they usually impose the global gag rule, which means they cut of financial support to all organisations that informs, guides women and perform safe abortions. This has a huge impact of women’s reproductive health. The rule is usually reversed when there’s a democratic president elected. The global gag rule was last imposed by Trump, and then reversed as soon as Biden took office.

A lot of countries have very strict laws regarding abortion, making it practically impossible to have a safe and legal abortion, even if the pregnancy is the result of rape or incest, or even if the girl is minor. But the thing is that strict laws do not prevent abortions! And these laws more often than not, go hand in hand with a lack of information about family planning and reproductive health in general. In the same countries we often also see high levels of gender based discrimination and violence against women. So the combination of lack of information, lack of access to prevention, lack of access to safe abortions and gender discrimination is a deadly cocktail for the women living here. It is also why the countries with the strictest laws regarding abortion have the highest abortion rates.

So what can we do about this?

First of all, we must never stop addressing the issue, and put pressure to grant women access to adequate information regarding their own reproductive health and family planning.

We must ensure that organisations and health facilities have the sufficient financial support to inform women, educate them and provide a safe environment to perform abortions.

We must support groups and organisations that work to improve women’s status, and to end gender based discrimination.

As individuals we often feel powerless, but we can raise our voices and speak up about this. And we can support various organisations financially. There are many organisations working within this area, and I’m sure you can find one that you see worthy of your support, whether it is UN supported organisations, or independent ones as Doctors without borders, Amnesty International, Red Cross etc.

Doctors without borders runs clinics and work with the issue on site in the field. Amnesty International puts pressure on governments to end unjust laws and to stop putting women in prison for a miscarriage or an abortion.

I have given just a very few examples of the organisations dealing with these problems, you are welcome to add to the list.

A huge step backwards

I just finished reading Ken Follett’s second volume in the trilogy “The pillars of the earth”, “World without end”. It takes place from the1320’s to the 1360’s, in other words in the Middle Ages.

In this period, women were seen as the property of men, their fathers, their husbands. An aristocratic widow could be ordered by the king to remarry someone chosen by him, the king. Women were seen as inferior, creatures with no brains, or at least not capable of coping with matters such as theology and medicine. These were subjects studied my men only, and more, only by monks and priests. Nuns were acting as nurses, but with no authority to even question the “cures” prescribed by the priests. And the priests were clinging to the old methods, refusing any change, so they could keep their power and stay superior.

We like to believe that we have come so much more forward these days. We’re living in 2020, and women are working as doctors, lawyers, scientists. They are even astronauts!

Women, in the western part of the world at least, marry a man of their own choice, or a woman of their own choice. We decide whether we would like to have babies, or not. Or do we?

I follow the news on the subject of a candidate for the US Supreme Court. And I become astonished, and disgusted, even if there is probably no reason to be so, looking to the bunch of conservative, old men having a say over there these days. Not to mention the one guy that only do what benefits him and his family, because he has no scruples, no moral and no other goal than enriching himself. Well, enough about him.

What I did want to say, is that looking to the country, which motto is “Land of hope and glory”, I find no hope and no glory at all.

I find Christian conservatives, who live by (extreme) double standards. I find they want to reverse the right to free abortion and the clinics offering family planning advice. I find they want to make it harder by the day to be anything but a white, heterosexual Christian. Preferably a male…

Their whole society is constructed in a way that gives women not many opportunities but to quit her job when she gets pregnant, because the cost of kindergarten is so high. Unless she’s a single mum, of course, who has to take on three jobs to feed her kid(s).

I read Ken Follett, and I see that we are still living in the Middle Ages in many respects. So I mentioned USA. We can take a look to some Asian and Middle Eastern countries, where women are STILL viewed as the property of their fathers and husbands. Where a woman’s testimonial is not worth anything, and where she can’t even leave the house without male escort. Where girls are deprived systematically of education, and only given the last scraps of food after the males of the family have finished their meal.

But even in Europe, who likes to think of themselves as progressive and modern, we find that women are systematically paid less for doing the same work as men. We find that they work more part-time to find room to take care of their family, or they stay at home for a longer period of time for the same reason.

I wonder when, if ever, women will be valued at the same terms as men? When will we be considered equal?

I read a story on a Norwegian news site about a conservative priest, a protestant priest even, that refused to worked with a female priest! There have been female priests in Norway for several decades! There’s even female bishops… And this was not recycled news from the 1960’s, it was like a week ago. In September 2020. In Norway, where mothers and fathers take equal leave to take care of their baby its first year, male priests still refuse to work side by side with a female colleague.

We might have come a long way in many respects, but we’re not done, by far.

It might seems odd that I, a Norwegian living in France, takes such an interest in the nominee for the Supreme Court in the US, but it’s quite simple. The US is, or at least wants to be, an example to the world. They want to export their democracy (which is not very democratic, and which is about to crumble to pieces if the sitting president is re-elected), they want to export their values. But right now they risk taking on something that will legitimize the suppression of women worldwide.

Why would conservative countries improve the lives and opportunities for their girls and women, or allow abortion, if the leading state of the world is going backwards? It will rather support the status quo.

Too many women risk their lives every day because they have to go through illegal abortions, performed by people with no or little medical training. Or they risk lifetime in prison if discovered. Making abortions illegal is not going to stop women from having them. Reversing the right to free abortions is not the way to go.

Choosing a religious fanatic to replace Ruth Bader Ginsburg on the Supreme Court is an insult to all women, not only in the US, but to the rest of us as well.

Den usynlige kvinnen

Jeg leste nylig en artikkel i britiske The Guardian, om hvilke alvorlige konsekvenser det har for kvinner at så mange ting her i verden er konstruert med utgangspunkt i menns fysiologi. Fra før har jeg lest flere artikler som tar for seg hvordan mange kvinner dør, helt unødvendig, av f eks hjerteinfarkt, fordi symtomene arter seg ulikt for kvinner og menn. Legene ser dermed ikke hva som er i ferd med å skje, og kvinner dør fordi legene ikke forstår at de har hjerteinfarkt.

Vi vet også at den medisinske forskerstanden er generelt mer opptatt av å forske på sykdommer som rammer menn, og mindre på såkalte «typiske kvinnesykdommer». Det gjelder også når det kommer til arbeidsrelaterte skader som kan spores tilbake til løsemidler og andre farlige stoffer. Alle undersøkelser, og alle anbefaler i forhold til eksponering, tar utgangspunkt i mannens fysiologi. Og hovedfokuset er, ikke overraskende, typiske maskuline yrker som industrien. Hva kvinner utsettes for i jobber som renholdere osv er ikke interessant.

Men artikkelen i The Guardian tar ikke bare for seg dette, men også hvordan blant annet bilseter er konstrukert etter mannens idealkropp (jada, jeg vet at ikke alle menn faller inn i den malen), og hvordan dette gjør at kvinner har 47% større risiko for å bli alvorlig skadet i trafikkulykker, og 17% større risiko for å bli drept i trafikkulykker. Det viser seg også at i de tilfeller hvor dummies utformet som kvinner blir brukt i kollisjonstester, så er det enten en nedskalert versjon av den mannlige, eller den blir testet kun i passasjersetet! Akkurat som om vi ikke sitter like mye bak rattet som menn.

Det jobber også stadig flere kvinner i politiet, og de utgjør også en andel av forsvaret vårt. Så skulle man jo tro at de fikk utstyr som passet dem og deres kvinnelige fysiologi. Men nok engang er det nedslående å slå fast at utstyr som kevlarvest (allment kjent som skuddsikker vest) er utformet med mannens kropp som modell. Så vil en kvinnelig politi eller soldat ha best mulig beskyttelse bør hun derfor ikke ha bryster eller hofter, da disse ikke passer med utformingen av vesten…

Listen i The Guardian er lang. Jeg skal ikke ta for meg alt her. Men jeg kjenner at jeg blir provosert. Vi lever i 2019, og allikevel har alt fra bilseter, verktøy og medisinsk forskning mannen som sitt dreiepunkt. Akkurat som om halvparten av verdens befolkning er høyst irrelevant, ja nærmest ikke-eksisterende! Jeg burde sikkert ikke blitt overrasket da jeg leste nevnte artikkel, men jeg ble faktisk det. Jeg trodde rett og slett vi hadde kommet lenger enn som så.


Det viktigste først!

En liten oppsummering av en av ukens viktigste nyheter:

Amal Clooney, kona til kjekkasen George Clooney, har vært på tur til New York City. Der skred hun ut i en nydelig gul kjole, som viste den søte gravidmagen hennes. Velkledd som alltid, men litt bekymring spores over at hun hadde valgt høye hæler på skoene, for hun er jo som nevn gravid. Med tvillinger.

Hvem hun liknet på? Noen sier Jackie Kennedy. Ingen dårlig sammenlikning. Det er et kompliment hun bør ta til seg.

Hva hun gjorde i NYC? Jeg er ikke helt sikker. Tror hun snakket om noe i en eller annen forsamling. Mulig det hadde noe med is å gjøre. Og Irak. Kan det være at hun snakket om at det ville være fint å bedre forsyningen av is til de gravide i Irak, nå som de går mot varmere tider?

Men spiller det egentlig noen rolle hva hun snakket om? Det viktigste var jo kjolen og skoene. Og at hun så slående vakker ut, som vanlig.

Noen som fremdeles lurer på hvorfor mange kvinner kvier seg for å engasjere seg offentlig?


Image result for amal clooney pictures

Foto: Wikipedia

Engasjement er mer enn å rope høyt i det offentlige debatten

Kadra Yusuf skriver i en kronikk i Dagsavisen 4. mars om damer og demokrati. Hun lurer på hvorfor så mange av oss kvinner bare vil ha det koselig og behagelig, og hvorfor så mange unge kvinner unnviker nyheter. For det handler om vår deltakelse i demokratiet og meningsutvekslingen, eller snarere vår manglende deltakelse i følge Kadra.

Jeg tror ikke kvinner bare vil ha kos og hygge. Faktisk tror jeg mange kvinner er engasjert, bare ikke sånn Kadra ser for seg. Engasjement handler om noe mer enn å bare rope høyt i den offentlige debatten, det handler også om å påvirke i de rom man befinner seg til daglig.

Når det er sagt, så tror jeg flere ville delta i den offentlige debatten hvis det handlet mindre om «å være på krigsstien» og mer om å finne konstruktive løsninger. Det er nemlig ikke bare de som roper høyt i gata som har meninger, det har også kvinnene som baker boller en gang i blant.

Nyheter er mer enn krig og konflikter, skatt og budsjett. Selv er jeg nyhetsjunkie, og jeg leser mye nyheter om krig, katastrofer og konflikter både her og der. Men jeg er også opptatt av at ungene mine skal ha en trygg skolevei, at de skal ha et godt skoletilbud, at nærmiljøet vårt skal oppleves som et godt sted å vokse opp. Jeg har sterke meninger om likestilling, likelønn og permisjonsordninger. Ergo, «myke verdier» er også viktig for meg. Er det å være opptatt av disse tingene å kose seg?

Mitt inntrykk av den offentlige debatten er at det ofte handler om å forsøke å slå ihjel hverandres argumenter, fremfor å diskutere for å komme frem til bedre løsninger. Og skal du vinne en debatt må du ha en høyrøstet og hardtslående retorikk og enkle argumenter. Det er ikke mye rom for nyanser og normal stemmebruk, noe som kan virke både demotiverende og skremmende på mange.

Kadra har rett i at deltakelse og demokrati ikke kommer gratis. Men jeg vil også påstå at det ikke ligger for alle å kaste seg inn i offentlig debatter eller stå øverst på barrikadene. Vi skal ikke kimse av det engasjementet som foregår i det «stille», i form av diskusjoner og samtaler rundt omkring de tusen middags- og lunsjbord. Det er mulig å være med å påvirke sine omgivelser og medmennesker ved å stille spørsmål rundt deres meninger og oppfatninger i det daglige. Alle når ikke frem i avisenes debattseksjoner, selv om de prøver. Der er det nemlig kamp om plassen.

Kathrine Aspaas siterer lederen av Mediemangfoldsutvalget, Knut Olav Åmås, i en kronikk i Dagsavisen 7. mars. Han sier at stadig fler vil ha kunnskap og nyanser, og de vil ha substans.

Selv er jeg ganske forsynt med svart-hvitt nyheter, og ikke minst overflatenyheter. Jeg savner at flere journalister spør om «hvorfor», istedet for bare å referere til «hvordan» ting er, uansett hva de skriver om. Jeg tror mer dyptpløyende journalistikk vil få enda flere engasjert, både kvinner og menn, unge og gamle.

Engasjement er viktig, og nødvendig for demokratiet. Derfor blir jeg trist når noen former for engasjement løftes frem som bedre enn andre. For det er bedre å være engasjert, om enn i det små, enn å ikke være engasjert i det hele tatt.





Feminisme, pupper og Emma W.

Det er hardt å være kvinne og feminist. For uansett hva du sier eller gjør, så kan det visst brukes mot deg. Av andre som kaller seg feminister…

Emma Watson har de siste årene stått på barrikadene for kvinners rettigheter, og hun er FN kvinnesaks goodwill ambassadør. Stort sett har omtalen av hennes arbeid vært positiv, men nylig forsøkte noen å gi henne et skudd for baugen fordi hun viser halve puppen i Vanity Fair.

Emma selv tilbakeviser kritikken blant annet ved å si at det handler om kvinners valgfrihet, og hun ser ikke hva puppene hennes har å gjøre med saken.

Jeg er forsåvidt enig med henne. Vi har kjempet, og kjemper fremdeles, en kamp for kvinners rett til å disponere over egen kropp. Om Emma viser halve puppen frivillig i et dameblad, hva er poenget med å hisse seg opp over det? Da er jeg mer betenkt over endel andre kjendiskvinner som stadig viser rumpa og puppene i den tro at de fremstår som troverdige feminister. For hva annet har de på sin såkalte feministiske agenda, enn å skape blest om seg selv som artist?

Så kan vi vende blikken den andre veien. For det er ikke bra å kle for mye på seg heller, om du ønsker å fremstå som en troverdig feminist. Har du på deg en hijab, så vær sikker på at du får pepper for det også. For hvordan kan du være en troverdig feminist hvis du dekker til håret ditt?

Igjen får jeg lyst til å sitere Emma W, som sier at feminisme ikke er en kjepp til å slå hverandre i hodet med. Det handler om å stå opp for kvinners rett til å gjøre som de selv vil.

Når det er sagt, så registrerer jeg med en smule tristhet, at når kvinner opptrer i media, så fokuseres det ofte mer på hva hun har på seg (eller hva hun ikke har på seg) enn det fokuseres på det hun faktisk har å si.

Jeg ser frem til den dagen vi klarer å konsentrere oss om substansen i budskapet, heller enn klærne som dekker kroppen til den som snakker.

Jeg registrerer også at menn aldri, eller i alle fall ytterst sjelden, har det problemet at journalister og andre er mer opptatt av snittet i dressen, antall skjorteknapper åpne eller fargen på slipset, enn det de sier.

Hvor interessant er det for kvinner i det lange løp å heve sin stemme i det offentlige rom, hvis alle tilbakemeldinger går på påkledning og ikke budskap? Eller er det sånn at det faktisk finnes en veldig snever kode for hvordan kvinner skal kle seg for å bli hørt og tatt seriøst? I så fall har vi ikke kommet særlig langt.