Response to interpellation 2023/24:491 on separate bathing times for men and women
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
The debate concerns separate swimming times for men and women. L argues that honor-related violence and oppression must never be accepted and that the government must never adapt to honor norms 1. L emphasizes that individual freedom and equality must apply to everyone and that one must defend equality gains by crushing the honor culture 1. L argues that the government is determined to crush the honor culture and that they will look at active legislative measures to repel honor oppression 2. SD argues for a zero tolerance towards separate swimming times 3 4. SD argues that such permissions are a step backward for equality and an acceptance of a medieval view of women 3 4. SD considers separate swimming times to be a product of Islamist ideology aimed at gender apartheid and control of women 5. SD considers that Sweden must never change swimming times or anything else based on cultural special demands from people who have moved here 4. SD argues that cultures are not static and that one must be prepared to violate [norms] to fight against oppression in the name of religion 6. SD considers that the government must take primary responsibility and introduce legislation that prohibits gender-discriminatory opening hours.
Written by AI in advance and may contain errors. The numbers lead to the speech a statement builds on; check against the text below.
Statsrådet Paulina Brandberg (L)
Madam Speaker! I have been asked whether I and the government intend to prevent separate bathing times from being allowed in Sweden.
I want to thank the member for their commitment to equality and for countering honor oppression. The government's position on this issue is clear: Honor-related violence and oppression can and must never be accepted. Individual freedom and human rights shall apply to everyone in Sweden.
Honor-related violence and oppression constitute a very serious violation of people's fundamental freedoms and rights. The area requires increased attention and visibility so that this violence and oppression can be effectively prevented and combated. The violence and oppression are based on strong patriarchal and heteronormative notions and constitute a major obstacle to achieving equality between women and men.
According to the Discrimination Act, discrimination on the grounds of gender is prohibited for those who provide goods and services. The prohibition does not, however, prevent women and men from being treated differently in terms of services if there is a legitimate purpose and the means used are appropriate and necessary to achieve the purpose. The Equality Ombudsman has reviewed cases regarding violations of the prohibition against discrimination applicable in the provision of services by introducing specific swimming times exclusively for women and men in municipal swimming halls. DO has concluded that the establishment of specific women's hours at swimming and sports halls shall only be considered compatible with the Discrimination Act in exceptional cases. The main principle shall, according to the law, be equal treatment between genders, and exceptions shall be applied restrictively. As a government minister, I naturally cannot comment on individual issues that fall within the scope of DO's supervisory responsibility.
Combating honor culture is a priority for the government. For us, it is a matter of course that honor oppression can never ever be accepted by society. The work for everyone's equal rights and opportunities, an equal society, and freedom from all forms of men's violence against women, other violence in close relationships, and honor-related violence and oppression will continue.
Sara Gille (SD)
Madam Speaker! Thank you, Minister, for the answer to my interpellation! But I must nevertheless begin by saying that I am not entirely satisfied with the answer I have received.
That DO has concluded that the establishment of separate women's times at swimming pools and sports halls should only be considered compatible with the Discrimination Act in exceptional cases means, therefore, that it may occur. Instead, there should be a zero-tolerance towards separate bathing times in swimming baths. That the main principle is that there shall be equal treatment between the sexes and that exceptions shall be applied restrictively does not mean that it should be stopped.
I understand, of course, that the Minister cannot comment on individual issues that fall within the scope of DO's supervisory responsibility. However, I believe that the Minister, in the position she holds, can nevertheless state what the government considers in the matter.
We have known for some time that this is a red-green policy, a policy that the previous government cherished: to prioritize men's interests over women's.
For several years, we have been a country where we have adapted to those who have settled here and displayed a nonchalant and disrespectful attitude towards our culture and our norms. Why should we conform to their women-oppressing views? Several of the red-green lot argue that this leads to increased equality, which is absurd.
An acceptance that separate bathing times may occur in Sweden is a major step backward for equality. That some can see that separate bathing times for men and women is a step towards a more equal society is pure madness. How can it be considered equal when women are to conform to men or when women are not fit to shake hands with? All such things reduce women's freedom.
Sweden is a country where everyone has the same rights and obligations. We are an equal country. We are not an Islamist country.
One should not be forced to hide their bodies because there are men who cannot control themselves when they see a girl or a woman in swimwear in a swimming hall. In that case, it is the men who have no business being here. It is not the girls and women who are at fault.
Several parties have ignored the problem and turned a blind eye or, even worse, even contributed to the changes we see all around in our country.
Madam Speaker! In February this year, one could read in the newspaper about how the red-greens are yielding to the culture of honor and allowing Islamist rules regarding opening hours in swimming baths. Men and women are now to be allowed separate bathing times in swimming baths in Husby.
It is a decision that has been made by the Social Democrats and their supporting parties, and which they justify by stating that swimming proficiency among girls and women must improve. Apparently, they believe that it is not possible to achieve better swimming skills if one shares a pool with someone of the opposite sex. Otherwise, it is something that we have actually succeeded with previously here in Sweden.
In more and more municipalities, separate swimming times are being introduced for women coming from cultures where it is considered a woman's responsibility to ensure that men are not attracted to her. But we can also see gender-segregated physical education lessons and so on.
Instead of a society with great cohesion between men and women, one wants to create parallel societies with different cultural backgrounds, which results in girls being singled out as different and with different rights than boys. Among other things, the Socialdemokraterna have been proactive in implementing separate swimming times for women from other cultures.
Madam Speaker! This is something that everyone, even a minister, can have opinions on, and it would be interesting to hear what Minister Paulina Brandberg thinks about separate bath times. Does the minister truly believe that this contributes to increased equality?
Nima Gholam Ali Pour (SD)
Madam Speaker! Many who have come to Sweden from the Middle East came to this country because they wanted to escape the shackles of the Islamists, which include, among other things, separate prayer times for men and women as well as the Muslim veil. These people who sought out Sweden to escape the Islamists have been betrayed, because the ideology they fled from has gained favor among far too many decision-makers in Sweden.
One of the first things the Islamists did after the revolution in Iran in 1979 was to divide the streets into a male part and a female part. This is not an innocent measure where one respects a certain religion, but it is about maintaining a gender apartheid. It is about controlling women from childhood to old age. The politicians and decision-makers who enable such an order, where women are isolated in certain spaces to be controlled in the name of religion, are equally responsible as the Islamists.
Controlling women in this way is not something that characterizes the Middle East. Countries such as Iran, Afghanistan, and Egypt have had periods when women have had a quite strong position in society. Today's Middle East, where women are oppressed in almost all Muslim countries, is a product of Islamist ideology. This has nothing to do with freedom of religion, because Islamists use religion to exercise political power.
Separate bathrooms for men and women or normalizing the Muslim veil has nothing to do with religion or God. It is about an ideology where the goal is for one gender to be oppressed. That idea is not particularly sacred. It is a sick idea.
It is absolutely possible to have a discussion about Islam and how it affects Sweden. But that discussion is separate from the discussion about political Islam, where an ideology seeking political power has convinced far too many Swedish politicians that the Islamists represent all Muslims. They do not. The authority that the Islamists receive in Sweden comes primarily from political parties such as the Socialdemokraterna, which year after year have elevated these groups and given them an authority that they actually lack.
If the Islamists are given a platform and succeed in influencing politics, they also gain legitimacy among Sweden's Muslims, which is very dangerous because it leads to a radicalization of Islam. There is no reason for politicians and decision-makers to involve themselves with Islamist groups that lack respect for democracy and equality. Nevertheless, this has happened.
I hope that it is this government that once and for all distances itself from these Islamist lobby groups. They have different names, such as Ibn Rushd, Islamiska Förbundet or Islamic Relief, but all of them actually represent the Islamist movement.
Madam Speaker! We have freedom of religion in Sweden, but freedom of religion is not the freedom to oppress women in the name of religion. If one oppresses women in the name of Islam, one has nothing to do in Sweden. In that case, one should go to one of the many countries ruled by Islamists, and unfortunately, there are many such countries.
Statsrådet Paulina Brandberg (L)
Madam Speaker! The interpellor asked me to be clear about what the government's position is regarding separate bathing times. Here I want to be very clear.
The government's crystal-clear position is that we in Sweden shall never, ever, and in no way adapt to honor norms. Honor norms stand in complete contrast to what the government shall work towards according to the gender equality goals that the Riksdag has decided upon - that men and women shall have the same power to shape both society and their own lives. This stands in opposition to the honor norms. For the simple reason, we shall never yield an inch. We shall never carry out any adaptations whatsoever to honor norms.
In the debate, it is sometimes argued that this is necessary so that girls and women can learn to swim, for example, and that it is for their sake that this is being done. In that case, one misses the bigger picture.
Where do we end up if we start adapting in that way and if we start adjusting our society according to honor norms? What is the next step? What other activities and places are to be gender-segregated? What will it look like in our schools and preschools? Shall we have separate nap times for girls and boys in our preschools? Shall we have different playgrounds in our schools? How shall it be in our libraries? With the same argument, one could say: Yes, but we want girls and women to be able to go to libraries. Therefore, we must have separate sections or times in the libraries for girls and women.
This is an incredibly dangerous path to take. The government's position is crystal clear: That is not the path we are to take. We shall not adapt to codes of honor.
Those in our society who make decisions that mean we adapt to honor norms - it happens all the time in Sweden, I want to say - bear an extremely heavy responsibility for the vulnerability that, above all, girls and women who find themselves in an honor context are subjected to and for the lack of freedom they are subjected to. It is about the limitations in their lives and about their inability to control their own body, their own sexuality, or their choice of life partner. Those who adapt to honor norms bear a responsibility for this vulnerability.
Madam Speaker! Sweden is one of the world's most equal countries. We often stretch ourselves in international contexts and think that we have a well-deserved first place. This first place we can never take for granted. We can never take the gains we have made in the field of equality for granted. We must defend equality every day in our country. Among the most important things we can do right now in today's society to defend equality and the gains we have made in the field of equality is to crush the culture of honor in every way and never adapt to honor norms.
Sara Gille (SD)
Madam Speaker! Thank you, Minister, for the answer! I actually appreciate the Minister's answer. I completely agree. We must become better at defending equality. We must become better at stopping the Islamization and the advance of the culture of honor here in this country.
When one allows the introduction of separate bathing times, one simultaneously allows a culture with a terrifying view of women. One essentially says that it is okay to treat girls and women as less worthy and that it is okay to control the female sex.
It is oppressive that some are not allowed to swim together with their classmates and that the genders are kept apart with different swimming times. By allowing different swimming times, among other things, one contributes to a medieval view of women that belongs several hundred years back in time.
One blames the girls for awakening desire in men while simultaneously telling the girls that they do not have the right to their own bodies. One sends the wrong signals to young girls – that this is a normal way to view girls' sexuality and girls' bodies.
Some argue that it is a question of religion and culture. I argue instead that one can see this as the Middle Ages returning to Sweden. One can see many similarities between how women in the Middle Ages were treated and how Islamists' women are treated and how women who live under honor oppression are treated.
Madam Speaker! The Middle Ages was a hard time for most, and it was a particularly hard time for women. Most women were subordinate and dominated by men. They were regarded as men's property and could be punished and beaten if they did not do as they were told.
The women who live under honor oppression and the violence of the Islamists live a life similar to the life that girls and women lived during the Middle Ages. Sweden shall not return to the Middle Ages.
We shall not contribute to anything that strengthens the vulnerability of women and girls and the oppression of them. The public baths shall never have different opening hours for men and women. We shall not allow distinctions to be made between men and women, and we shall not let an oppressive culture - a culture that diminishes women and robs them of their freedom - gain influence in our society.
Those who demand an adaptation to medieval values can simply seek out another country. Such a form of culture simply does not belong here. Sweden shall never change either prayer times or anything else based on cultural special demands from people who have chosen to move here to our country.
Madam Speaker! We simply shall not go back to the Middle Ages.
I would like to take the opportunity to put a question to the Minister. In what way does the Minister intend to act in this specific issue? Does the Minister intend to stop separate bath times in Sweden?
Nima Gholam Ali Pour (SD)
Madam Speaker! In 1864, men in Sweden lost their legal right to beat their wives. Until then, one had had something called the wife-beating right.
Cultures are not static. The idea is that we should act when we see a certain injustice within a culture or a religion. There is no culture or religion that can sanctify oppression. The only ones who enable oppression are we humans - either when we allow oppression in the name of religion, such as with separate prayer times for men and women, or when we remain passive.
We must also be prepared to offend in order to fight against injustices. I am sure that some men were offended when the wife-ownership was abolished in 1864. But it was done anyway, because it was the right thing to do. Now we live in a time when certain individuals coming from other countries are offended when one wants to remove their right to oppress in the name of religion. But we must do it, because it is the only right thing to do.
There are different interpretations of Islam, and I am sure there are quite a few of them. But it is not any god or Allah who wants to oppress. It is people who oppress other people. They usually do it for selfish reasons. They do it to feel power. We politicians have a responsibility to prevent this, even if some might feel offended.
For those who believe that one's culture or religion commands them to oppress, there are countries other than Sweden, countries that legitimize this. Go to those countries if you want to hold onto your oppression! In Sweden, we violate the oppressors.
Statsrådet Paulina Brandberg (L)
Madam Speaker! I completely share the interpellator's view on this. We shall not go back to the Middle Ages. We shall not go back to a society where men and women have completely different conditions to decide over their own lives.
To respond to the Member of Parliament's closing remarks, I can say that if people who practice honor oppression are offended because measures are being taken to crush the culture of honor, I will in any case interpret that as us being on the completely right track. I hope that we will get there, because we in this government will never see it as a viable path or in any way reasonable to adapt to the honor norm. I feel great concern regarding how honor oppression and honor norms are spreading in Swedish society.
I will this week receive a partial report from an investigation that this government has commissioned. We have tasked the investigator to look into, among other things, whether the breaking of honor-related violence and oppression should constitute its own equality policy sub-goal.
The reason we have included this in the directives is that we see the complexity that exists in a context of honor. Here, we do not have a perpetrator and a crime victim, but here we have collective structures that restrict individuals' lives and which we see place demands on society to adapt to the honor norm.
Madam Speaker! Recently we could read in the newspapers about an investigation in Malmö, where one sees how widespread honor oppression is within schools and preschools. I unfortunately cannot say that I am surprised when I take part of this investigation, for all the signals I have received show that it is precisely as bad as appears from the investigation. I am unfortunately also convinced that Malmö is not unique in that respect.
In order to be able to counter this specifically in school and preschool, we must see that we have three groups that we must work with which constitute problems in this context.
We have a group that has too little knowledge about honor culture. They are unable to see the signals when students at schools are subjected to honor-based oppression and can therefore not offer adequate help. There, we obviously need to work with knowledge-enhancing measures.
We also have a group that has knowledge but is anxious. One is anxious that someone, for example, might be offended or perhaps afraid of pressure from guardians. There, we must take measures that target that anxiety.
The third and final group that we must direct efforts towards – and here large-scale efforts are required – is that where one works in, for example, preschool, school, or social services and oneself is part of the problem. One practices honor-based oppression oneself and upholds honor-based oppression in the school and preschool.
This government is determined to crush the culture of honor. Then we must work broadly within these areas and within all the groups that I just mentioned.
Sara Gille (SD)
Madam Speaker! I am still missing an answer from the Minister on how she and the government intend to act regarding specifically separate bathing times. It is very good that there is other action you are taking regarding honor-related violence and oppression, but I am missing an answer on just this part.
I do not understand how this can exist in Sweden in 2024. We should have come much further away from the oppression of women.
That municipal politicians are even allowed to decide on this is madness. We have different governments in different municipalities, and the government must take the primary responsibility in this matter. The government must set a line for how the different municipalities shall relate to separate swimming times. One should be able to go down to the municipal level in this issue, as well as in many other issues, and say that separate swimming times must not be introduced, instead of allowing the gender oppression that actually exists in today's society.
Here, I actually wish that our government acts a bit better. If one considers that segregated bathing times do not belong here in Sweden, one can actually introduce legislation that ensures we do not have directly gender-discriminatory opening hours, opening hours where persons of a certain gender are allowed to visit the bath.
Madam Speaker! I must nevertheless say that I appreciate debating with Minister Paulina Brandberg. I can feel that we have similar views on many issues concerning honor-related violence and oppression as well as men's violence against women, and I hope that we have that even in this issue.
It is good that the government sees the fight against honor-related violence and oppression as a priority, but I hope that the work on everyone's rights and opportunities in life will yield great results out in society.
With that said, I would like to thank the Minister for the debate. I hope that she takes this with her in her continued work against honor-related violence and oppression.
Statsrådet Paulina Brandberg (L)
Madam Speaker! To answer the question of whether the government intends to stop separate bathing times: These are decisions that are made at the municipal level and which the government cannot interfere in.
As I mentioned in my opening remarks, we have a non-discrimination act that has a strong main rule that we may not discriminate on the basis of gender and that it can only be considered acceptable in an equal and democratic society to make distinctions between men and women in exceptional cases.
Nor even in the Equality Ombudsman's activities can one, as a government minister, intervene in individual cases. But I think it is important that clear practice is created for what is considered acceptable exceptions. From the government's side, we will never consider it an acceptable exception if the purpose is to conform to honor norms.
I will follow this question closely, and if active legislative measures are required, it is of course something that this government will look into in order to, in various ways, ward off honor oppression in our society.
With that said, I would like to thank the interpellator and the Member of Parliament for this debate on an important issue.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.