For many of us the extremist brand of gender feminism that has permeated Swedish culture and politics came acutely into focus last year. The YouTube video of a group of female students murdering a man reading a newspaper and their ecstatic post murder dance celebrations, revealing that exposure to and advocacy of male genderocide, is an accepted part of the Swedish education systems indoctrination of their youth, “do your part.” 
Letters to Australian parliamentarians including the then Foreign Minister Kevin Rudd asking for our government to expresses diplomatic alarm at such vilification on the basis of sex, fell on deaf ears. An AVFM commentator provided a link to the Swedish documentary (with English subtitles) “The Gender War” (Könskriget) by journalist Evin Rubar, which is highly recommended viewing for anyone who has not yet seen it and interested in the truth about Swedish feminism. 
The most disturbing aspect of this documentary is the confirmation that the central tenants of radical feminism have been accepted in Sweden as core political orthodoxy and all aspects of legislation and government services must adhere to it’s “gender correct” understanding of male dominance and oppression.
Veteran Aussie broadcaster Phillip Adams recently interviewed Oscar Swartz the author of a new book, A Brief History of Swedish Sex: How the Nation That Gave Us Free Love Redefined Rape and Declared War on Julian Assange. 
Adam’s introduces the Radio National show with a quote from an expatriate Swede now a professor at the University of Chicago:
From being admired and envied by many as beacons of sexual enlightenment from the 60’s the Scandinavian countries today have some of the most repressive sex laws in the western world, Sweden in the most draconian. The message conveyed by recent laws is clear – your sexuality is the property of the state and the state will claim its right to regulate and punish that sexuality wherever you may be.
Swartz’s book tells in chilling detail how this situation has come about. It presents, as a time line, events that made headlines (from the 1950’s to early 2012), quotes from parliamentary records and the public speeches and writings of the key players. Minimal commentary is offered, as the author believes these items speak for themselves and don’t require embellishment.
In Part 1 Swartz illustrates The Rise of Swedish Sin with pioneering sex liberals arguing for women to have the same sexual freedoms as men (were presumed to have), and that this should also be extended to those often excluded from enjoyment of sex such as the unattractive, physically and intellectually disabled, elderly, ill, infirm and even the imprisoned. The impact of Swedish films, which routinely breached decency laws in other western countries, the growth of the sex club industry, and acceptance of mid teenage sex as healthy normality are all detailed.
Part 2, titled The Fall of Swedish Sin, shows the ideological U-turn initiated by radical feminists that now viewed sex as a tool of power and dominance wielded by men and over women. Sex, they argued, should only be tolerated in committed and loving relationships. Male sexuality was demonized and increasingly criminalized and punished to shame men into behaving in more “relationship oriented” ways. Covered in this part is first the redefining of rape and the introduction of the “Sex Purchase Act,” which criminalizes purchasing of sex from prostitutes but not the selling of sex by prostitutes, who are seen as misguided victims of patriarchal oppression.
Part 3 is called the War on Sex and exposes the absurdity of many of the public arguments and actions of powerful radical feminists. In the ideological but disproven belief that pornography causes sexual violence, regulations are enacted to insist government funded hotel use will only be at “porn free” hotels, that is hotels where adult content is not available for purchase on in-house entertainment systems. Subsequently late night adult content on cable TV is banned.
Despite being acknowledged as one of the most gender equal societies in the world, feminist politicians regularly describe average Swedish men as comparable to the Taliban and Sweden as like Afghanistan so far as its treatment of women is concerned. The outrageous claims regarding sex trafficking and the supposed ramping-up of prostitution in Germany in “preparation” for the FIFA world cup in 2006 highlighted to an international audience the insanity of Sweden’s state delusions. Calls were made for the UN and Amnesty International to intervene and Sweden to withdraw from the EU in protest. This would be comparable to US government acting on the Super-Bowl / DV myth amplified thousands of times.
In the fourth and final part The War on Men, “progressive” strategies in enforcing the Sex Purchase Act are revealed. Hotel staff are trained in how to spot potential sex purchasers and instructed to report suspects immediately to the police, whose special “sex agents” are dispatched to listen outside the hotel rooms and sweep in for an arrest if sounds of sexual activity are heard. Hotel employees are provided with contact cards and posters placed in staff rooms, hotels performing well are more likely to receive government-funded business.
Meanwhile special sex units tail known and suspected prostitutes to track down men who might illegally pay them for sex. Further, changes to the definition of rape include the addition of “pleading” for sex, now considered a type of “sexual coercion and molestation,” or sex that even years later a women did not feel good about. Everyday sexual encounters between consenting adults can now be turned into legal nightmares, with rape defined not by the intent of the accused or the belief of the supposed victim but by only be trained legal personal who truly understand what is meant by rape under Sweden’s legislation. The increasingly severe penalties for rape are contrasted with the leniency of sentencing for grossly violent assaults.
Naturally the Swedish tourist groups do not detail these repressive laws in their glossy brochures, and many tourists are still under the illusion that Sweden is a sexually liberal country, like it’s neighbor Denmark. Yet the rate of rape in Sweden is reportedly 8 times higher than Denmark and second highest in the world after Lesotho in Africa.
The details of the Assange case also emerge including the probability that part of the motive for it was as a distraction from prolonged unsavory national media focus in the lead up to an election when two Social Democratic Workers Party candidates are caught purchasing sex while staying in a union flat.
One of Assange’s accusers is well known Radfem Anna Ardin who had published on her blog “Rebella” a list of how women could legally take revenge on an unfaithful partner – including sabotage of his new relationship, enticing his new partner to be unfaithful, having “a lunatic” stalk him, and sending letters and photos to make the new partner believe he still has a relationship with the avenger herself.
The sordid details of the Assange case and interference from politicians and bureaucrats in the legal procedures around draconian gendered legislation will have to wait for another article. Assnage’s barrister has, however, correctly stated:
It is not Julian Assange that is on trial here, but Sweden and its reputation as a modern and model country with rules of law.
Not unexpectedly, Assange has received no useful support from Australia’s current feminist labor government, and is now seeking asylum in the Ecuadorian Embassy in London.  However, in another recent case of an Australian female solicitor detained in Lybia on suspicion of espionage, the new foreign minister Bob Carr is immediately dispatched to assist. Well, after all she deserves it. She’s a mother. 
A Swedish feminist academic from Monash University in Victoria Dr. Johan Lidberg, joined Swartz in the radio national interview to represent the “counter viewpoint.” He believes the Swedish laws are not a war on sex or on men but simply supporting a women’s right to say no to sex at whatever stage of a sex act she determines. He applauds such laws as being beneficial in reducing exploitation of women and human trafficking for sex. He denies the existence of “state feminism” in Sweden and argues that women as still not empowered, citing the usual unequal representation on company boards, gender pay gap, more male professors etc.
Yes, that’s feminist logic for you – convicting more men of rape helps empower women and is necessary to improve numerical equivalence of gender outcomes, Dr. Flood and underling Fisher would be proud of Johan!
There is no doubt that gender ideologues in Australia, who echo their Swedish sisters dogma almost verbatim, covet such a situation existing here and are planning for it.
The unconstitutional, feminist Labor organization EMILYS List (EMILY’s List is an acronym that means Early Money Is Like Yeast “it makes the dough rise”) has, as its core aim, feminist control of the Australian Government and imposition of a feminist agenda on the electorate. Emily’s list has a sex discriminatory constitution allowing full membership only to women.
Whilst the objectives of Emily’s list outlined on their public website might appear relatively tame at first glance, the organization is strongly supported by radical feminists and academics whose true motives and male hatred we have come to know well.