”Feminism has no monopoly on gender equality,” writes Alf Ronnby in a letter to the editor on the DN View and line up a variety of feminist traditions: likhetsfeminism, radical feminism, queerfeminism and anarcha-feminism.
There are also more variations, as liberalfeminism, marxist feminism, and a part count also the so-called difference feminism (which assumes that there are fundamental differences between men and women), among others. Thus, we can conclude that feminism is not a single idea or ideology. Many are talking, therefore, rather on the ”feminismer” in the plural.
a long and rather straggly thought and free – and rättighetsrörelse which we can draw inspiration from in order to organize society in a way that promotes gender equality and equal treatment. As a phd in sociology and associate professor in social work should Ronnby be very well aware of this.
What Ronnby also not mentioned is that he besides be DN-readers also are active debater on the outermost right edge. In the right-wing New Times, noting he, for example, over the word ”hen” and how the media (especially national Television) is fascinated by the ”attention-grabbing sexuality”.
He uses the recurring derogatory names such as ”böglobbyn” and ”homomaffian” and shuns the ”perverse” form of homosexuality. He argues that heterosexuality is an important moralregel to maintain a balance between women and men and that ”the causes of the moral decay we now see in the christian world, is the exodus from the christian faith and rampant individualism”. No wonder he dislikes feminism!
the political wing of that research come to be known as the anti-genusrörelser. What unites them is precisely that they see gender, gender equality and sexual equality as a threat to the heterosexual family unit and thus the christian civilization, themselves pillars.
”Traditional values”, they see as the remedy. In the countries where their representatives come to power we see the result in the form of liberal democracy dismantling (Poland and Hungary). A typical strategy they have to win a hearing for their ideas is to pretend to represent the ”common people”. Perhaps it is therefore Ronnby to highlight their academic titles in their letters to the editor?
equality, feminism and sexual rights – and what we can do based on a variety of different perspectives. But then we’ll do based on what we actually know about the various feminist tanketraditioner, with the open cards on the ideological positions we represent, and with clear visions about what future society we envisage.
How are you, Alf Ronnby, a future anti-feminist and heteronormative way society should look like? What are the ”real changes” you want to see for women? And whose rights do you want to restrict to get there?