E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
By F. Brinley Bruton, msnbc.com
LONDON - Polemical filmmaker Michael Moore seems in no doubt that dark forces are behind the rape and sexual molestation accusations leveled against WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange in Sweden.
“Governments and corporations go after individuals … they go after people with this kind of lie and smear,” Moore told MSNBC’s Countdown with Keith Olbermann. “This is all a bunch of hooey as far as I’m concerned.”
But while many WikiLeaks supporters contend that powerful international interests are misusing Sweden’s sterling feminist credentials to stifle the man at the helm of the organization, the debate in the country has taken a dramatically different direction.
Many in Sweden reject claims that Assange, who appeared in a London court Tuesday, is the victim of a U.S.-led conspiracy. Instead, the country has been gripped by a very public and often explicit discussion about intimate behavior and relationships. The case has even made some question whether feminism has been taken too far in this supposed bastion of gender equality.
Assange is wanted in Sweden for questioning after two women accused him of rape, sexual molestation and unlawful coercion. Stockholm is seeking his extradition from Britain although he has not been charged with any crime.
Feminism is a mainstream concept in Sweden and the country has among the toughest sex crime laws in the world. In fact, lawyers have been known to joke that a man must get written permission before having sex.
“WikiLeaks has vocal supporters (in Sweden), who by the way I am one,” says prominent feminist and journalist Johanna Koljonen, whose blog posts helped kick-off a fervent discussion when she revealed in intimate detail an experience that echoed the allegations against Assange.
But her support for the organization has nothing to do with whether Assange is guilty or not under Swedish law, she added. However, his case has reminded her of an encounter that left her uncomfortable.
“I woke up in a sexual situation with a partner with whom I has just a few hours earlier had consensual sex on the condition that we use a condom,” she wrote.
“It is often very clear what a rape is and what has happened, but even then we know it’s difficult for the parties to get a fair hearing in court,” Koljonen added. “Then there are the situations in which acts have been performed which may or may not be illegal, depending on the parties’ negotiation of consent. This principle makes legal situations complicated, but it is of vital importance: we should not and cannot legislate acceptable sexual practice.”
Koljonen’s blog post fed a growing discussion and soon Prata om det (#prataomdet on Twitter), or “Talk about It”, was born. The website has received more than 226,000 page views with the average user staying for seven minutes.
'Honest conversation'
The site encourages users to discuss negative sexual experiences and reveal times when “boundaries were violated.”
“Initiating an honest conversation about sex and consent is scary,” the site says. “Reactions can be cold or even hostile towards those who try. Because of this, many people hold their tongue and put a lid on their thoughts – but that doesn’t make the thoughts go away.”
In a post entitled “I’m a nice guy,” one male user posted that despite his best efforts he has not always behaved in a way he is proud of.
“I have the notion that I have a very enlightened and equal view on sex,” he wrote. “Sadly, my feelings and practical application isn’t as evolved and that hurts both myself and others close to me.”
In Sweden, the word "tjatsex" - defined by Koljonen as "nagging sex ... sex that you talked someone into having even when they didn’t feel like it" - has even entered the mainsteam.
Journalist Sonja Schwarzenberger, who has been involved with the website since the beginning, says it is a forum for women and men to safely discuss negative sexual experiences.
“Our idea was, how not to make it black and white is to say, 'here it is, this is my experience.'”
Fair trials difficult?
For weeks, the debate has dominated the airwaves and newspapers in Sweden.
But while many view the ability to discuss the ambiguous intimate issues as a positive thing, the gray area often referred to and the country’s relatively broad definition of rape alarms others.
Pelle Billing, a M.D. who lectures and writes on gender and men's issues, worries that Sweden’s rape and domestic violence laws make it difficult for men to get a fair trial.
He cites a quote by the lawyer for Assange’s accusers, who went to the police for advice before deciding to file charges.
“Women who are assaulted don't always define it as that,” said lawyer Claes Borgstrom, who is the Swedish Social Democratic Party’s spokesman on gender equality. “It's a big problem in our society and it can be difficult to assess what has happened if you are not a lawyer."
“So how is man supposed to know what the boundaries are if the women don’t know?” Billing asks. According to him, feminism in Sweden has stopped being about equal rights and has begun to infringe on men’s rights.
So Billing spends little time worrying whether the case against Assange is the result of U.S. pressure on Sweden and instead focuses on whether Swedish courts uphold the presumption of innocence for men accused of rape and domestic violence.
Billing was excoriated in public for discussing his beliefs and the Assange case on a leading current affairs program.
'Without shame'
Even some Swedes who call themselves feminists concede that sexual violence and rape laws are sometimes applied unfairly.
“It is important in this Julian Assange case to understand the situation,” says Per Samuelson, a defense lawyer who focuses on defending men accused of rape. “Everyone (around the world) is shouting that Julian Assange is innocent (but) people in Sweden think otherwise because they tend to believe the women in over 90 percent of the cases.”
Comments like these no doubt trouble Assange and his defense team. But they are in stark contrast to the views espoused by vocal WikiLeaks supporters such as prominent Canadian feminist Naomi Klein.
“Rape is being used in the Assange prosecution in the same way that women's freedom was used to invade Afghanistan. Wake up!" she said of the case against him.
But for many in Sweden, the Assange case has crystallized important issues around personal boundaries, sexuality and the law.
As journalist Koljonen says: “How can judges and juries and the media be expected to speak honestly and think coolly about things we can’t even say to ourselves without shame?”
Leave a Comment:
...I'm in disbelief of some, most, of the comments here. Instead of throwing out ideas on a given topic it's become this massive flame war; the ones that I usually see on my friends' FB pages during a class president election. Both my parents made the decision to take a portion of their lives in order to take care of me and my younger brother without any argument as to who had to take what gender role.
Men and women alike are accountable for their actions. Comparing men to serial killers isn't really a valid point since all men aren't serial killers. It's like saying all Germans are Nazis or all birds can fly. We can't rightly assume something of the opposite sex as we aren't the opposite sex. All we can give are our observations and in some cases, those observations are skewed by a war waged inside a person's own mind, corrupted by an already darkened aspect from some experience that may have changed it early on.
I think the point of the debate is to show that perhaps some laws have gone too far in protecting the rights of women but it was worded as feminism having gone too far. Someone had to come up with said laws in the first place and to say it's entirely on the hands of the feminist movement doesn't seem right. Anything extreme or excessive is bad. That's not to say the laws in place are bad; no. People are just concerned that they may go too far in helping to indict not just Assange but anyone else that may be put in the same situation; male or female.
None of you a--holes are seeing the big picture,if he didn't do anything then wtf is he hiding in England for??All the comments here are stupid,clear your f--king name the move on right??
I'm 60, happily married to my 2nd husband, and it's either too late for me to be up reading or I need whatever you guys are drinking. Most of these comments don't even make sense. The ones whose point I can decipher appear to be a general free-for-all against Ewent (who seems to have suffered thru a very bad marriage and will fight to her death for the right to share that pain and the independence she feels she gained) and men who disapprove of her and/or women in general. And we have the woman who hates feminism and longs for the good old days when married women were their husband's property, and the fall-back to "remain chaste until marriage."
In addition to the above, we also have the usual comments from the CIA conspiracy suspect, the lack of any understanding or explanation of the sexual assault laws of Sweden, the atheist, the Gender Democracy (?) theorist and my personal favorite (heavy sarcasm)- Pig Man who loves Canadian law which he claims puts the age of consent at 14 and tells females to lay back and take it.
This is my only comment, which I hope will make some sense. While the headline questions whether feminism has gone too far, the simple fact is Sweden has sexual assault laws tougher than other Western countries. Sweden wants Julian Assauge extradited from the UK to face sexual assault charges. Assuming the proper legal steps have been taken by Sweden for extradition under the extradition treaty it has with the United Kingdom, then Assuage should be extradited. He is not above the law, nor below it. Sweden has a right to enforce their laws and Assauge is presumed innocent until proven guilty. He will have the right to face his accusers and to require the Swedish government to prove his guilt. Neither his celebrity with some and his infamy with others over Wikileaks is relevant to his problems with the Swedish government.
Wasn't one of Moore's radical books among the list of favorites on Tucson mass murderer Loughner's website?
Kinda says something for this whole "Assange Fringe". These folks are really anarchists at heart. They despise organized government and are ready to destroy, either though direct action or personal wealth what they hate...
The current Wikileaks "drama" is not only focused on the US...It is really focused on ALL world institutions and this will be played out as a viable alternative to the failure of communism...
You heard it here, folks....Now think about it..
No time for anyone who likes peace and stability to be smug on this issue...this is seminal
Julian Assange is essentially charged with rape on two different accounts:
In the first his condom broke, and he didn't stop having sex at that point . . . so obviously he raped her. (Some say that at that point he allegedly used his body weight to pin her down and finish the act. He is a heavy guy, after all.)
In the second account, after having consensual sexual relations, presumably the morning after, the Assange allegedly had sex with the women while she was still asleep. So obviously it was rape. (Seriously, how bad does the sex need to be for someone to sleep through it?)
Come on, it's freakin computer geek Julian Assange we are talking about here, not Mike Tyson, either one of those women could have kicked his ass if they had wanted to.
Sheesh. It is a wonder any man can even get it up in Sweden, sounds like the country is so tight that the very act of getting an erection can get you 5 years in prison.
I am a man married 20 years to the same woman. She is the manager of our household and I bring home the money. We believe and live out the biblical model of female submission to male leadership. The liberal straw-man factory likes to pump out narratives of this type of arrangement that depicts the woman as a weak idiot, living in fear of a tyrant husband who sits on his lazy butt and orders her around. That couldn't be further from the truth.
A truly biblical marriage is one in which the man sacrifices EVERYTHING, including his dreams and physical safety, for the well-being of his wife and kids. A man who will sacrifice career advancement, and his softball league or the promise of a night alone in the quiet to give his wife a back rub or encourage her in some issue that is of concern to her. He will work two jobs himself to provide the means to allow his home manager wife to make sure their hearth is a place of love and nurturing for the kids. He will at all costs keep other women out of his life and stay faithful to the gift God has given him.
The rise of feminism in the west has corresponded to a loss of the sense of manhood that says we were made to take the hits for our family, to death if necessary. Any man who abuses his wife or children by beating, berating or emotionally abusing them deserves a beat down or worse himself. He is not ready or worthy to bear the cost that is demanded to start and maintain a family. Society even tells men now that they don't have to BE men. Just do whatever you want and since everyone else does it, who cares? What a crock.
Men and women are different. Men and women are equal. A woman who does the same job as a man should be paid the same as a man. A woman who cannot do the job of a man because she is physically not able, should not be doing it. In front line units of the military, if a woman is unable to pull a 200 lb man to safety, she is a liability to her squad. Likewise a woman firefighter. When feminism gets so out of control that it puts other people in jeapoardy, then yes, it is out of control.
I believe that women are intuitively smarter than men when it comes to perceiving the motives and desires of people, especially their own children. And so do you all out there reading this.
Women are also more caring and have no irritating sense of machismo that makes men do stupid things. I know I will get castigated for saying it, but hey we all know it's true. There are ceratinly examples of nurturing men, and tough physically strong women, but the exception doesn't disprove the rule.
This Assange guy wouldn't be in trouble, and the liberal media wouldn't be so conflicted reporting on this, if he had kept zipper up and stayed in a married, committed relationship. Men need to dump this misguided hyper tough guy loner mystique and be willing to hunker down and be faithful to a single woman, to death. Men are pigs when it comes to sex, and feminism has given them the open door they need to get what they want without providing the stability necessary for the relationship to be safe for a woman.
Some will think I'm a throwback, and you are right. But I hope to God that my daughter marries a man who will die for her, and not use her like a hoe because Gloria Steinham or some other radical libber gave him permission to.
@Ewert
Your one of the most unhappy people I have ever met.
I read one of your earlier posts where you described yourself as a "gorgeous woman."
Just because you can have a one night stand or NSA sex with a hard ten(male) doesn't mean you are a hard 10.
Then one of your earlier posts you tell us your a single mom with two sons. That you divorced your "no-good" husband and you are "best friends" with a guy.
It sounds like your unhappy with your life. That you want your "guy friend" to be with you but you can't because you have to take care of these "future men." I doubt your claims of divorcing him, I have a feeling he left you.
Funny.
Women will only be equally respected by me when they act like equal adults. I don't suspect that will ever happen so to me, as a class of people, they will always be hybrid adult-children. For God's sake, grow up. If a guy doesn't have a condom on and you don't wanna have sex, speak up for yourself. Refuse to have sex. Tell him off, etc... Women, as in this case, always want a "law" to protect them from just about everything. In addition, men, we are soooooooooo stupid and don't stick together at all. None of this crap, absollutely none of it, could happen without men. Women must have men enforce their misandry as women cannot control men. So, basically we have a system where men betray other men as a matter of course. Finally, an example. Could you imagine men lobbying to have a new law made where they could have propreitors of steak houses jailed and receive court dates based on having their steak cooked the wrong way. That's the equivalent of what women do. "We had an "agreement" that my steak was to be cooked medium-well but he gave me a medium. Since I am a helpless child I couldn't just speak up for myself and have him re-cook it. I couldn't refuse to eat it. So, I ate it down THEN I went to the police and had the propreitor arrested." It's LUNACY. Men and only men can stop this because women are too immature, selfish, and self-indulgent to do so themselves.
You can't make such generalizations. There are men who fit the negative traits you listed as being of all women, and plenty of women who are the opposite of what you claimed them to be. Many laws are asinine, but the goal of preventing violent crime is not. I agree that responsibility to put a stop to things if she is uncomfortable lies with the woman. If she says no and the man doesn't stop, regardless of reason, it is rape.
Rape is not the equivalent of having a poorly cooked steak.