Oscar Swartz :: Texplorer

Assange, Ecuador, Rape, and Sweden - 3

In my three part series on Assange, Ecuador, Rape and Sweden I promised to expound upon the following subject:

3) Even if Assange would be convicted in Sweden he would not serve any time.

In part 1 I argued that the Ecuador asylum application could not really be explained by an urge to escape the Swedish legal case since he would not serve any time in Sweden and since the broader issue of being an enemy of the United States seems forgotten. 

This is a comment I did on the Ecuador case via a Skype video interview from the Swedish countryside for RT.com:

 

In part 2 I wrote about the allegations against Assange and claimed that no Swedish woman has actually accused Julian Assange of raping her but that the Swedish state seeks him for one count of "less aggravated rape" (of his one-night stand admirer SW) anyway. There are however one or more lesser potential offences committed and morally condemnable acts, given that we believe the stories of the accusers.

In my new book A Brief History of Swedish Sex I don't go into the accusations or details of the legal case at all. I put the Assange case in a political context in Sweden where sex is politics today. I will therefore go into some detail here:

SW's story is that she did not want sex without a condom, due to fear for STDs and pregnancy, but that JA anyway initiated this without her knowledge (after first having protected sex a couple of times at least). She became aware of it very soon and then she accepted it and let him continue with the words "You better don't have HIV" to which he responded "Of course not". This is what she herself told the police.

Given that we believe the details of the story I think most people would say that the act of going forward with condomless sex seems morally deplorable. Legally, it may be another matter, since SW accepts it. She apparently regrets it afterwards however. Her friends later convinced SW that she should go to the police.

A Swedish Chief Prosecutor considered this act to not entail any sex offence whatsoever. Presumably she considered SW to have given a post-factual consent. Those who vote for rape (including the Head Prosecutor who brought forth the rape allegation again, after it had been dismissed by her colleague) focus on the act of initiating unprotected sex, while discounting the subsequent consent to continue the act. 

There is another woman (AA) who accuses Julian Assange of one main sex offence: She tells in the interrogation protocols how Assange wished unprotected sex but only begrudgingly accepted to use a condom. Afterwards she came to believe that he had deliberately broken it in order to ejaculate inside her.

[Update: I should point out that Julian Assange has already been interrogated in Sweden about this encounter and that he denies AA's claim. I use the leaked interrogation protocols as a basis for my postings, but obviously have no way of evaluating who is right. But I want a more rational and calm evaluation of events. There are enormous emotions involved here from supporters and detractors].

Let's assume the worst possible scenario, that it actually happened that way. Morally, it is obviously reprehensible to deliberately break a condom. But from a legal point of view, what kind of offence is it?

It seems that this is not as well regulated as I guess many would expect. There are two main issues, STDs and pregnancy (discounting a general distaste for fluids).

In Sweden anyone who is knowingly infected with HIV has a duty to actively inform a sexual partner about it. The one who does not inform before sex commits the crime "attempt to gross assault". It does not matter (as in most cases) whether no infection was transmitted, s/he can be sentenced to prison. The crime is to not actively telling. Not informing and breaking a condom while the partner had insisted on a condom would most likely be classified as "gross assault".  It seems that Assange is not knowingly HIV-positive so that law would not be applicable. Note that these are non-sexual crimes.

It has been suggested in some interrogations that Julian Assange would wish to see small Assanges populate the world and might try to increase the probability for pregnancy from a sexual encounter through condomless intercourse (something that would presumably not be a particularly effective strategy, since most women use their own contraceptives to prevent pregnancy).

But if that were in fact the case, trying to induce pregnancy, wouldn't that be a gross crime? In fact not a crime at all, at least not in Sweden.

The reason is most likely that it would be bad for women as a group to criminalize the specific act of deceptively inducing mother- or fatherhood, at least if we demand gender equality from the judicial system. I have talked to a law professor who says that the judicial system takes an almost Catholic position: every child is seen as a blessing to the parents.

Pregnancy for a woman is of course a major event but can be terminated. But a man who becomes a father against his will has no legal recourse whatsoever. It does not matter whether the woman intended to become pregnant and lied about her own contraceptives, or - I conclude - if she e.g. saved a condom with sperm and injected that sperm into herself later. She certainly commits no crime by doing this. He cannot ask her to make an abortion, it is entirely her choice. And he will be financially liable for a child he did not want, huge costs. Neither can he get damages from her for her deceptive behavior. Fatherhood is strict, probably to "protect" women and children.

In the U.S. there is a debate concerning these issues. Katie Roiphe recently wrote in Slate.

Just a few days before the sexual encounters in the Assange case a 16-year old boy was convicted of killing a 16-year old girl in Västerås in Sweden. They were fuckbuddies. He saw her as a friend and an outlet for sex. She supposedly fell in love and suddenly announced she was pregnant and he was the father. He tells how he tried to convince her that they would destroy their entire youth and lives by having a baby at 16. He pleaded with her for a month or so to abort the pregnancy, offered her money and things. Nothing helped. They talked about it every time they met and eventually he freaked out into a desperate and violent rage that ended with her death. [I have read the entire investigation, just a link to one article about the case here (in Swedish)]

To deliberately break a condom has in fact been classified by the Head Prosecutor and the Svea Court of Appeals as the weakest sex offence: "sexual molestation". It is legally seen as grabbing the crotch of someone unwilling.

This is the main offence that Assange is wanted for when it comes to AA. The other two offences seem to have been strenuously extracted from the story of AA to make the whole episode more punishable. A non-sexual crime is thrown in: "unlawful coercion", when Assange is supposed to have grabbed AA's hand and weighed her down in connection with sexual intercourse. This was not done to coerce her into any sexual act however so it is calssified as a non-sexual offence. Subsequently Assange is supposed to have rubbed his frontside against her backside when he continued to stay in her apartment, classified as "sexual molestation".

What sentence could JA get? I have read quite many court cases on sex crimes and from that I see it as highly unlikely that Julian Assange would get a higher sentence than let's say 18 months of imprisonment, even if convicted on all counts, including the gravest, "less aggravated rape". In my book A Brief History of Swedish Sex there are a number of legal cases with sentences cited. Those who read it are in for a surprise when sexual crimes are compared to violent crime. Sexual touching is regarded as much more harmful than gross violence.

As I understand it (but noone should take this as legal advice, legal experts should corroborate this), Julian Assange would not serve any time in a Swedish prison, even if convicted. Sweden has a system with detention of suspects under quite wide circumstances. In theory one can be locked up for years while an investigation is performed. If the suspect is convicted and sentenced that previous detention is subtracted from the sentence. If you end up in the negative the state can be forced to pay damages. The rules for subtracting time are found in Law (1974:202) §19. Other laws are referred to there. But my conclusion is that the kind of detention that Julian Assange has been subject to, where he has to report to a police station every day, is counted, also when abroad, when it has been requested by Swedish prosecutors.

To conclude: There may be morally deplorable behavior involved in this case. That's what the two accusers claim.  From the point of Law it is not as clear. Even if convicted Julian Assange would most likely walk out as a free man immediately after a trial, since he has been under detention for 569 days so far, almost 19 months.

Sweden's top diplomat Sverker Åström and Wikileaks

Today Swedish top diplomat Sverker Åström died at the age of 96.

He was basically the architect behind Sweden's security policy doctrine during the cold war: "Non-alignment in peace aiming at neutrality during war". Radio Sweden has the story in English. As a diplomat I don't think Sverker Åström liked Wikileaks and #Cablegate. I talked to the Sweden's ambassador to Berlin once and he was shocked by Wikileaks. Such transparency would make all diplomatic work impossible. 

There is anyway a link from Sverker Åström to Wikileaks. I founded Sweden's "free speech" Internet Service Provider, named Bahnhof, in 1994. Sverker Åström posed for a Christmas card to Bahnhof's customers where he says that he has sent all his op-ed articles to newspapers from his Bahnhof mail since 1998: He sits in Bahnhof's first major hosting center. I parted with my colleagues in 2004, but they uphold the free speech tradition. Hence, Bahnhof was the main hoster for Wikileaks when #Cablegate was released, but hosted in their new James Bond-like hosting bunker, Pionen White Mountains.

 

Jan Eliasson, another Swedish top diplomat and former Foreign Minister says in Dagens Nyheter: "He had a drastic humour and spread enourmous joy around himself with his eccentric behavior, bicycled in tuxedo to gala dinners, had red and green socks". The latter can indeed be seen in the picture above, taken when he was 87. At 88 he came out as gay. In 2004 he was bestowed the major Prize at the QX Gay Gala, "This Year's Homo".

When Sverker Åström turned 90 I revealed that he had actually performed work for Bahnhof. A link to my birthday article (in Swedish).

I picture googled and discovered an image of us, apparently at an opening party for a restaurant in Stockholm, Roxy. Image is deep-linked from this article.

At the end of his life he created the Sverker Åström Foundation for the Furtherance of Swedish-Russian Relations: "The fellowships are designed to allow a number of young citizens of the Russian Federation, aged 20 to 35 years, to acquaint themselves with conditions and achievements in Sweden in their respective fields of interest, such as political science, law, economy and administration. Other fields may include art, music, dance and theatre. "

Links to Swedish media about his death: QX, DN, SvD, SvD, AB, HD, GP, Carina Rydberg.

---

Don't miss my two recent articles about "Assange, Ecuador, Rape, and Sweden", Part 1, Part 2. Part 3 will follow. I discovered that my two first postings have been translated to Spanish and published by Ecuador's state newspaper El Telégrafo without my knowledge. Sure I could accept that, but I think they should spell my name right and give a linkt to my blog and my new book A Brief History of Swedish Sex, on the subject of Sweden and Assange.

Assange, Ecuador, Rape, and Sweden - 2

I continue my posting on the misunderstandings of the Assange case. In my preceding posting I argued that the Ecuador strategy is not an attempt to avoid the Swedish sex case. Swedish media is myopic and self-obsessed. Anyone who reads my fresh and well-researched book A Brief History of Swedish Sex will understand how any sexual act involves a high amount of politics in today's Sweden and how the Swedish state, based on an extremist view of sexuality, can spin out of control.

Tragically, Swedish media is not a mitigating force. It willingly participates in creating scandals and injuring people, based on such views on sexuality, as is clear from my book.

Internationally, it is interesting to instead look at the letter about Sweden and at the list of signatories that demand that Ecuador grant asylum to Assange.

2) No Swedish woman has claimed that she was raped by Julian Assange. 

If you read the police protocols you will see that the two Swedish women (AA = the Social Democrat that Assange stayed with, SW = the one-night stand admirer) wanted Assange to commit to tests for HIV and STDs, since they realized he was sleeping around a lot when they learned about each other.

There are witnesses who talked to AA and say the demand was that Assange take an HIV test. Otherwise they would go to the police and try to force him to. He said he didn't have time but seems to have realized that they meant it. When he consented they had however already gone to the police. Not to report rape but to simply tell their stories. None of them has ever claimed to have been raped by Julian Assange.

So how could this become a national obsession for Sweden?

Once you tell a story of sexual behavior to the police they look for Sex Offences. As I show in my book there was a connection to Swedish domestic politics with an election campaign. Based on the story that SW told the interrogating police officer (who was a party comrade and radical feminist friend of AA), the police notified the on-call Prosecutor. Based on a purely oral briefing by the police via phone she decided to seek Julian Assange for rape. 

It seems that SW was quite shocked by this decision by the police and prosecutor. She had participated in sex play that ended with unprotected sex, and not objected according to her own account, but she was panically scared by sexually transmitted diseases and HIV. She never claimed to be raped but she wanted Assange to be tested. Suddenly the State sought him for a crime that normally carries a two year imprisonment as a minimum sentence. As "the victim" there is nothing you can do. The State sees it as an important task to enforce its own view of sexual encounters, independently of the people involved.

One day later a higher Chief Prosecutor read the interrogation protocol. She states that in the description of the sexual encounter where the police and a lower prosecutor found one count of "rape" there was no crime whatsoever committed. She says she believes the story that was told: "But the content of the interrogation does not support any claim that a crime has been committed"

Enter Claes Borgström.  In Sweden virtually anyone who claims that someone else has commited some sexual offence gets a payed-for legal counsel by the state. S/he is supposed to help you go after the other party. The reverse of a defense attorney. Claes Borgström was a party comrade of AA, heavily involved in the election campaign, since he was the Gender Equality Spokesperson for the Social Democratic party. He would get a Ministerial post in the Government if they won. He applied to serve as the state-payed legal counsel for the two women and started running his own show. Borgström is a notorious radical feminist in Swedish politics, despised by many, loved by some. He has been running a war against men for years in Sweden and consistently picked fights, denouncing Swedish men as Taliban etc..

Borgström is the one who demanded that the Assange rape case be reopened after the Chief Prosecutor closed it. He appealed to a Head Prosecutor. Borgström himself seemed unsure whether what the women described could be seen as anything else than the weakest sexual offence category. I requested his application from the Court and I believe my book is the first and only place this document has been cited. He wrote:

"According to my evaluation the abuse of the injured parties have suffered should at least be labelled as sexual molestation, maybe also as graver sex crimes"

One of Borgström's ever repeated views on sexuality is that people don't understand when they are sexually abused. They have sex in ways that the state must take care of, against their wishes. Borgström commented to a newspaper when they pointed out that SW did not consider herself raped: "She is not a lawyer".

Borgström has demanded state propaganda campaigns to teach people when they have been subject to a sex crime. In my book A Brief History of Swedish Sex, Borgström appears a lot. There are mindboggling citations from this man's writings. You will not believe your eyes!

So with Borgström at the rudder the case was turned into politics and became an important principle for the Swedish state. Sex is much more harmful to Swedes than violence. In my book I show that some brief sexual touching is seen as a worse crime than kidnapping someone, keeping him locked-up and tortured for hours until he is unrecognizable to his own girlfriend, with injuries taking months to heal. Borgström is a co-architect behind this.

Assange is now wanted for questioning concerning  "less aggravated rape" of SW - although she has never claimed that she was raped. There are also some lesser sexual offences that the Head Prosectuor picked out when she read the description of sexual encounters between AA and Assange. One of them concerns rubbing a penis against the backside of a person you previously had sex with.

My book does not go into details of the sex case. Rather, it puts the case in a context of vitriolic Swedish sexual politics.

Personally, when I read the interrogation protocols I see a man who is not particularly responsive to his sex partners and wants it his own way. This is not equivalent to being a rapist however, and no woman has claimed she was actually raped. But I think it is quite likely Assange will be convicted of some offence in Sweden.

There will be one more posting where I argue that Assange would not serve any time in Sweden, even if convicted of the most serious of his alleged sex offences, "less aggravated rape"..

Assange, Ecuador, Rape, and Sweden - 1

It was a huge surprise that Julian Assange suddenly checked into the Embassy of República del Ecuador in London. The twitter reaction from leading Swedish media personalities, in the midst of a Football match, was predictably myopic - and as nationalistic as Football.

The picture that came into their minds was that of an Australian brute who was invited to Sweden, raped a couple Swedish women and now applied yet another stunt tried to escape those allegations.

There are so many misunderstandings in the Assange case that someone must put the picture straight. I will divide this in 2 or maybe 3 blog postings to argue a few important points:

1) Julian Assange is regarded as an enemy of the United States. The Swedish case is a nuisance compared to that.

2) No Swedish woman has actually claimed that she was raped by Julian Assange.

3) Even if Assange would be convicted in Sweden he would not serve any time.

With that knowledge I think it would be logical that the Ecuador strategy has to do with the U.S., not Sweden per se. I develop point 1 in this posting. The others will follow.

1) Assange is regarded as an enemy of the United States of America.

Don't make any mistake about it. The United States of America is ruthless when it comes to "national security", as defined by themselves.  The revenge will come. They collect information from all the internet companies they can, they pressure Bradley Manning with absolutely inhuman methods. There is a Grand Jury.

Could the US ask the UK to have Julian Assange extradited now? Sure, if they have built the case already, which is not certain. But that would complicate things. Sweden wants him also. The United States are very patient. I would think that the easiest way to proceed from a US perspective is to let the Swedish case have its course first. As long as Julian Assange is nailed later in order to send a message to the world: Don't mess with the USA!  

So what about the legal arguments that the UK would have to consent to an extradition to the US if he is transferred to Sweden? I have not researched this in detail but this is an irrelevant consideration. Maybe it applies formally to some limited time period when Assange is held by Swedish authorities as a consequence of an extradition from the UK. I will show in a follow-up posting that Julian Assange would be very quickly set free in Sweden, no matter if he is convicted or not even prosecuted. Even if convicted he would immediately be released. He would then be a free man on Swedish ground. I don't see that the UK could possibly have any influence on Swedish-US bilateral dealings at that time.

Sweden has delivered what the US wants earlier. Indeed, Sweden has instituted general wiretapping of all internet and phone traffic that pass Sweden's borders, in order to give that intelligence data to the US for something else, maybe a promise to intervene if the Russians come once again. Sweden is the country for Russian transit data since a vast proportion of their communications cables pass Sweden. We hardly have any military at home anymore. Our few troops are in Afghanistan to show that we are a reliable ally of the US without being a member of NATO.

Sweden raided the Pirate Bay at the request of USA. The mode was clear: Swedish authorities were flown to Washington, where they clearly stated that Sweden will obviously not break its own laws in Sweden to help the US. Instead they gave out very detailed instructions on what Sweden needed from American firms in order to initiate a big crack-down on The Pirate Bay. Wikileaks #cablegate cables later showed how Sweden consistently bows to demands from the USA. That piece was written by Pirate Party founder Rick Falkvinge.

Sweden is actually known and criticized for extra-judicial deportations when the concern is US national security.

I want to remind everyone of Rop Gonggrijp, the Dutch internet freedom activist. He held a keynote at the Chaos Communications Conference in Berlin in December 2010. He was involved for some time in Wikileaks but opted out when he realized that he would become an enemy of the American state:

I could have stuck around helping WikiLeaks also. They could probably have used me when they released the war diaries or these cables.

That did not happen. I guess I could make up all sorts of stories about how I disagreed with people or decisions, but the truth is that in the period that I helped out, the possible ramifications of WikiLeaks managed to scare the bejezus out of me. Courage is contagious, my ass.

I wish Julian and his people well, but I can’t live a life out of a backpack while on the run. Not to mention the fact that Julian has better hair and does much better soundbites.

I wrote about it in detail a long time ago. Focus on the Swedish sex case obfuscates the bigger issues here.

---

I have written about Wikileaks since 2007, and later about Assange. I have also just written a book that helps us understand Sweden's actions. It is named A Brief History of Swedish Sex and is a well-researched time-line of how Sweden turns from the world's leading nation of sexual liberty to become a country where sex is regarded as something intrinsically harmful. Necessary reading to understand how the Swedish case against Assange could become a national priority. It is a great read! 

Den 39:e teckningen

Högsta Domstolen frikände ju idag mangakännaren Simon Lundström för innehav av teckningar som han tidigare hade fällts för i Tingsrätt och Hovrätt. Länk till HD.

För 38 av teckningarna fann man att det inte är straffbart för någon att inneha dem. En av bilderna ansågs som straffbar men att det för Simon Lundström som mangaexpert och översättare var försvarligt och att just han inte skulle dömas för den.

Jag skulle hävda att HD undvek att ta ställning till en viktig princip hela vägen ut. Så här:

Man delar upp materialet i två grupper. För 38 av bilderna anser man: "Men samtidigt rör det sig om fantasifigurer och det är uppenbart att det inte är fråga om avbildningar av några verkliga barn.".

HD menar att det är oklart om lagstiftarna avsåg att kriminalisera den typen av bilder. Man ställer då en fråga som normalt lagrådet gör innan lagförslag läggs fram: Vore en sådan inskränkning i överensstämmelse med svensk grundlag, närmare bestämt Regeringsformen där Yttrande- och Informationsfrihet stadgas? Med informationsfrihet menar man "rätt att ta del av andras yttranden", exempelvis då inneha en bild som någon annan skapat.

HD väger informationsfriheten i relation till syftet med en eventuell kriminalisering av innehav av tecknade fantasifigurer. Syftena har man letat fram i förarbetena.

Det huvudsakliga skälet till att kriminalisera tecknade bilder var att sådana "pornografiska bilder är kränkande för barn över huvud taget". Själv underkänner jag ett sådant skäl helt. Att förbjuda innehav av någon form av information, text eller bild, för att den "kränker" en grupp i allmänhet är helt enkelt aldrig godtagbart.

HD tar dock fasta på detta och hittar två lägre rankade skäl: att man inte kan utesluta att levande barn använts som modeller samt att bilder skulle kunna användas till att locka barn till sexuella handlingar.

Vad gäller fantasiteckningar anser man att ett innehavsförbud av sådana vore en oproportionerlig inskränkning i informationsfriheten, givet de syften med kriminalisering som lagstiftarna angivit:

"Det anförda leder till slutsatsen att en kriminalisering av innehav av de 38 nu berörda teckningarna skulle gå utöver vad som är nödvändigt med hänsyn till de ändamål som har föranlett straffbestämmelsen. Vid en tolkning i överensstämmelse med regeringsformen kan straffbestämmelsen därmed inte anses omfatta innehav av dessa teckningar."

Sedan finns där en 39:e teckning som beskrivs så här: "En av teckningarna (g24.jpg) skiljer sig från de övriga genom att barnet på bilden har drag som framstår som verkliga. Även i övrigt måste teckningen anses verklighetstrogen."

Den bilden anser HD definitivt är en sådan bild som lagstiftarna avsåg att kriminalisera. Men frågan de inte ställer i detta fall är om det även här är oproportionerligt. Nu har vi ju ingen konstitutionsdomstol i Sverige även om HD nästan uppträdde som en sådan i detta fall för en begränsad klass av bilder.

Man valde att fria Simon Lundström för denna på grund av att hans profession gjorde det "försvarligt" att inneha bilden men en "vanlig" människa skulle inte undgå straffansvar:

"Det har framkommit i målet att SL är expert på japansk kultur, inte minst mangateckningar. Han har bott i Japan i flera år och har arbetat bl.a. som översättare av mangaserier. Han har haft stora mängder mangateckningar i sin dator. Mot den bakgrunden måste hans innehav av en enda teckning, som i och för sig är sådan att innehav av den annars vore straffbart, anses försvarligt."

Notera att Beatrice Ask omedelbart svävar på målet och tycker att domen är problematisk när TT ringer upp henne. Hon framhåller att det kan bli besvärligt om man ska börja skilja på olika typer av framställningar av barnpornografi: "Rent allmänt kan jag säga att lagstiftningen inte gör någon skillnad mellan olika sätt att framställa en bild på och den inkluderar såväl enskilda barn som barn som grupp."

Frågan är om Bokus återigen kommer att börja sälja det japanska häfte som Karl Andersson översatte till engelska men som de drog bort ur sortimentet på grund av stolta moralister. Här gjorde Karl Andersson en intervju för Aftonbladet med en mangatecknare i Japan som gjort en bild som fälldes i lägre rätt.

Nyheter24, DN, DN, DN, SvD, SvD, Expressen, AB, Piratpartiets ledare Anna Troberg, GP.

Jag var den förste som intervjuade Simon Lundström om vad som hänt, då när han fortfarande inte ville gå ut med sitt namn offentligt för nästan 2 år sedan.

För övrigt är det Karl Andersson som designat omslaget till min läsvärda bok, den som får utlänningar att baxna: A Brief History of Swedish Sex. Jag gav en intervju om den här på WLCentral.org. Kostar knappt 60 kronor.

Picture special: Stop ACTA Berlin June 9, 2012

Political evangelist Rick Falkvinge, the original founder of the Pirate Party movement, wrote about the international Stop ACTA day.

I participated in Berlin. I bumped into old friends and new ones:

Starting point @ Universal Music @ Oberbaumbrücke.

Peter Sunde, well-known felon from The Pirate Bay, and exiled publisher Karl Andersson, who also posted a couple of photos.

Unknown young woman displaying the German Constitution, love her!

Danish activist, film-maker and more, Henrik Moltke.

From left Linus Olsson, CEO of Flattr.com. Behind him film-maker and activist Alan Toner. In the middle, convicted Pirate Bay felon Peter Sunde. Bak of neck of Jan Gerber of the former Pirate Cinema Berlin.

Strausberger Platz, flag from Piraten, but it was huge and wouldn't display itself often.

This is what it's all about.

Well, yes, even the policemen are much sexier than in Sweden and look like they just came from some gayish Berlin club.

I totally agree! This is @ Rosa-Luxemburg-Platz.

Pics from ACTA demo in Stockholm.

Don't forget my new book, A Brief History of Swedish Sex, about Assange and Sweden, that makes foreigners stunned. Yes, I have had many such reactions. They are flabbergasted since they could never imagine that Sweden had developed into this sexually repressive and extremist country. The anti-thesis of Berlin. It is a strong text! It received a lengthy, enormous really, review and analysis from serious Danish daily newspaper Information.dk today.

[PS. Man har deltagit i några demos för de rätta sakerna i Berlin. Idag var det alltså dags för Stop ACTA, precis som HAX rekommenderade. Och Christian Engström. Om ACTA har jag förstås skrivit tidigare. Det är emot lobbyister som denna man vänder sig, sådana som vill kunna stänga av folk från nätet om de använder det fel enligt hans uppfattning]

Svensk sex och venuspassagen på nationaldagen

Aftonbladet har upptäckt att jag skrivit en bok om svensk sexualpolitisk utveckling från 1950 fram till idag. Den som följt min blogg kan inte vara förvånad men en del har blivit paffa. Att de kallar mig "debattör hos tankesmedjan Timbro" är illvilligt förstås, eftersom Timbro är ett rött skynke för många AB-läsare.

Som fri skribent är jag tacksam att ha fått ett par rapporter publicerade av Timbro. Den svenska FRA- och integritetsdebatten hade varit fattigare utan mina rapporter om det övervakningsbesatta Bodströmssamhället. Men denna bok har absolut ingenting att göra med Timbro.

Cred till Aftonbladet som är smart nog att uppfatta omslaget på rätt sätt i motsats till en del jag sett kräkas över framsidan: "den nya boken, vars omslag liknar en gladporrfilms: "Swedish Sex" i 70-talstypografi, en blond lättklädd kvinna med förvånad uppsyn och vidöppen mun."

Just det! Men jag inser att det kan finnas många läsare som aldrig upplevt 1970-talet då gladporrfilmer var ett folknöje. De var mest danska. Vi var systerländer vad gäller sexliberalism men har utvecklats olika sedan.

Själv lyckades jag vid 14 års ålder på ett sommarlov slinka in på en då ny dansk gladporrfilm vars handling utspelade sig just under Venuspassagen, det astronomiska fenomen som inträffade i natt. Man skulle förstås vara 15 men biljettrivaren hade 70-talistisk förståelse för nyfikna pubertetskillar och släppte in mig. Filmen heter I Jungfruns tecken och uppskattas av många. Under Venuspassagen förväntades kvinnor födda i Jungfruns tecken bli okontrollerat upphetsade. Men skulle därför dela ut piller som dämpade sexlusten i staden. I stället förväxlades de med piller som ökade lusten. Resultatet kan man tänka sig.

Gladporren var en hyllning till levnadsglad. lössläppt och klacksparksmässig sexualitet. Idag ses sex mer som ett problem än en möjlighet där man på #prataomdet-manér ska älta och ångra gammal fyllesex.

Idén om boken kom när jag såg alla konspirationsteorier om Assange och Wikileaks, där CIA och honungsfällor diskuterades och där Sverige fortfarande tycktes ha ett rykte om sig som ett sexuellt accepterande land som inte tar sex på så blodigt allvar utan som en rolig aktivitet. Detta är ju uppåt väggarna fel.

Jag citerar Professor Don Kulick i boken: “From being admired and envied by many as beacons of sexual enlightenment in the 1960s and ‘70s, the Scandinavian countries today have some of the most repressive sex laws in the Western world. Sweden is the most draconian."

Så för att förstå Assangefallet behöver man inte nödvändigtvis blanda in CIA. Man behöver förstå svensk sexualpolitisk utveckling.

Boken är mycket läsvärd: A Brief History of Swedish Sex: How the Nation that Gave Us Free Love Redefined Rape and Declared War on Julian Assange.  

Jag har hört flera som fullkomligt baxnar över de resonemang runt sex som politiker och etablissemang uppvisar. Lagstiftning används för att styra män in i mer relationsorienterad sexualitet (vilket de anser är det kvinnliga väsendets natur). Den minister som ansvarade för sexköpslagen, Ulrika Messing (s), säger så här om sexköpslagen:

“I don’t believe that prostitution has anything to do with sex - at least not as I see sex, as something that belongs in a love relationship. Those who visit prostitutes obviously have a need for sex - but not for the kind of sex they would have with their wife or partner. It is slightly forbidden - and now it actually becomes totally forbidden.”

Så där håller det på.

Boken värderar knappt utvecklingen. Den presenterar. Fakta talar för sig själv och Sverige framstår för många som ett galet land och våra politiker som fullkomligt rubbade. Är de det? En del tycker nog att de är hjältar och på fullkomligt rätt spår, ett avantgarde. Läsarna får värdera själva och se om de vill vara stolta eller skämmas för Sverige så här på nationaldagen.

Jag har hört folk som vill vittna, få andra att läsa, få dem att se. Japp, jag tycker den är stark!

Nu finns det en webbsajt SwedishSexBook.com om boken med länkar till hur man kan köpa den. Beroende på vilket land man bor i tar Amazon olika priser. Men det finns ett annat alternativ som är bättre för svenskar som länkas där också, Smashwords. För under motsvarande 60 kronor får man en läsupplevelse. Ny med e-böcker? Det finns info på sajten. Boken bör ganska snart dyka upp i Apple iBookstore och på andra ställen.

Jag såg att härliga sexsäljaren och författaren "Greta Garbo" hälsar min bok välkommen men beklagar att den inte är aktuell för henne eftersom den är skriven på engelska. 

Assange har förresten stort fog för sin oro vad gäller Sverige. Vi låser in folk utan egentligt skäl.