by Bosse Parbring
In the summer of 2007, the previous Norwegian Minister of Gender Equality, Karita Bekkemellem, put together a Men’s Panel consisting of about 30 men, all of whom have made public statements about the role of men in society. However, the men represent a variety of views. Most of the political parties, as well as the media, the cultural sector, industry, labour organisations and academia are represented on the Men’s Panel. The purpose of the Men’s Panel is to trigger a public debate on gender equality among men. The discussions of the Men’s Panel can influence the Government’s work on the proposition on men and gender equality to be presented in the spring of 2008.
- Men have the right to have opinions and thoughts on gender equality from their own perspective. The Men’s Panel has shown that men have strong attitudes concerning the situation of men. And at the same time they also focus on women’s lack of gender equality in many areas, says the new Minister for Gender Equality Manuela Ramin-Osmundsen.
The Men’s Panel has really succeeded in starting a discussion. To begin with, however, it was more about the Men’s Panel as such. It was criticized for consisting of an elite of men, for all the members being men and for them not being masculine enough. One member has left the panel after criticizing its work.
Jørgen Lorentzen is researcher in comparative literature and post-doctoral research fellow at the Centre for Women’s Studies and Gender Research at the University of Oslo, specializing in men and masculinities. He thinks there is a point to there being only men in the Men’s Panel.
- It doesn’t mean that women do not discuss gender equality. They have done so for 30 years. The radical thing is that here only men discuss gender equality.
 |
| - It doesn’t mean that women do not discuss gender equality. They have done so for 30 years. The radical thing is that here only men discuss gender equality, says Jørgen Lorentzen. Photo: Bosse Parbring |
But the Men’s Panel is not only supposed to discuss the situation of men.
- At our latest meeting we discussed men in relation to traditional male and female professions. But we realised that we can’t have a biased focus on recruiting men to traditionally female jobs, but we must also recruit women to traditionally male jobs.
Icelandic model suggested
There are actually no expectations on the Men’s Panel to agree on certain shared opinions. The Panel did, nevertheless, give a first common statement in October 2007, in which it encouraged men to take greater responsibility for the care of their own children. The Men’s Panel suggests that parental leave should be divided into three parts according to the Icelandic model – one part for each parent and a shared part that can be divided as the parents choose.
- It’s a scandal that we haven’t introduced 4+4+4 months, says Jørgen Lorentzen.
- I have long thought that we should have 6+6+6 months with a lower compensation level. I think it’s safer for children to
start day-care at 18 months.
- The latest Ministers of Gender Equality have claimed that they will extend the quota, but this hasn’t been prioritized in the budget. A few weeks’ extension of the total leave is needed in order to implement 4+4+4 months. But a political will is also needed to ‘take time’ from the mother.
Children change men
Jørgen Lorentzen is also involved in the work to reduce men’s violence against women. The fact is that he thinks that an increased effort to get men to do more child-care is connected with an increased effort to reduce male violence.
- The work that happens between men and children is interesting. In their encounter with children, men train their empathic and caring attitudes, which in turn makes it more difficult to use violence. It is relatively easy to work on the relation between father and child.
- It also means that another kind of relation develops between fathers and sons. Boys get another kind of masculinity if their fathers are caring-oriented. The boys grow up into different kinds of adults. Previously only the mother has had this relation to the children. Children demand something else of the man, if he is to be close to them, which means that he must change in the encounter with children.
In Jørgen Lorentzen’s opinion, male violence is the clearest sign of the oppression of women. He thinks that the Government during the last few years has worked quite systematically in this area, for example by supporting various efforts to work with men who practice violence.
- In parallel with help to women who experience violence, we must increase the efforts for violent men. Men are not biologically evil. Working with the groups of men who are violent could have great consequences on the surrounding society. There is a clear connection between boys who experience violence as children and who are violent as adults.
- I also wish people would realise that there is a systematic connection between violence in the home and public violence. Researchers studying violence in different environments don’t communicate with each other. The experiences of those subjected to violence are the same regardless of whether they are men or women.
First published in NIKK magasin 2 2007 © NIKK
