Forced sterilization for transgender Swedes?

A friend brought to my attention the fact that in Sweden, to change one’s gender under the law, a person must submit to sterilization, forever forgoing the possibility of having children.

At first I didn’t see the logic behind such a law; a moment’s reflection, however, made it clear why some people want to force this terrible choice on transgender citizens.

The existence of gay, bisexual, intersex, and transgender people threatens the idea of a simple binary division of humanity into two genders. One can understand why this idea makes some people uncomfortable. People may aspire to be open-minded and not prejudicial; but in reality, people like the comfort of knowing at a glance what to expect from someone. People expect different behavior from men and women, for example. I imagine many women would feel uncomfortable sharing a toilet, shower, or dressing room with a person with fully functional testicles, regardless of the gender with which that person identifies. Testosterone affects attitudes, desires, and behaviors; so this reluctance is understandable. People who don’t fit into society’s predefined categories are scary to many because they challenge long-held and cherished assumptions. To grant rights to another, one must often be willing to give up some of one’s own rights.

Time for a trip to Stockholm?

Last winter, while in Andermatt recovering from my first bout with vertigo, I mailed my application for my new U.S. passport. It arrived not too long afterward. Well now, the time has come for me to renew my Swedish passport too. It’s not possible to apply for a new passport at the Swedish consulate here in Zürich; one must do so in person at the embassy in Bern.

So today I spoke with a nice Swedish lady at the embassy, and booked a time to come in and take care of the paperwork. She explained that I would have to bring ID with me, a proof of Swedish citizenship (kindly faxed to my office by the Swedish tax authorities in Stockholm), and 215 Swiss Francs. The price seemed a bit steep to me. I knew I didn’t pay that much for my original passport. A quick search online revealed a page from the Swedish Police, explaining the costs of applying for a passport. Applying at a police station in Sweden costs 400 SEK; applying at an embassy abroad costs 1400 SEK. The higher price is equivalent to just over 200 CHF; this explains the 215 CHF price quoted to me earlier.

It turns out there’s another reason I need to visit the police in Stockholm. Back in October, I received a letter that had been delivered to my permanent address in Stockholm and forwarded to me here. The letter was from the police in Stockholm. The letter advised me that they had my Swedish driver’s license, and that I should come to the police station on Kungsholmen and pick it up in person. I had been missing my driver’s license for a few weeks, and was glad to learn that it had been found. But it took me a moment to figure out how it ended up in Stockholm! Looking again at the letter, I saw that the Police had received my driver’s license from the Swedish embassy in Bern. Then I realized what had happened. In September, there was an election in Sweden. I voted at the Swedish consulate at Stadelhofen, right here in Zürich. When casting my vote, I showed my Swedish driver’s license as proof of my identity. I must have misplaced the license there in the consulate. They sent it to the police in Stockholm because Stockholm is the location of the permanent address on file for me with the Swedish tax office.

I had been planning to go to Sweden sometime in the spring or summer anyway; but now I’m thinking that if I have to pay one thousand Swedish kronor more to get the passport here in Switzerland, I might as well put that money toward to cost of air travel to Stockholm instead. Then I could pick up my new passport and my driver’s license at the same time, and spend a few days visiting friends too.

So now I’m looking at the prices of tickets to Stockholm for weekends in February and March. Obviously, I need to be there on either Friday or Monday too, so that I can be there on a day when the police station is open. So, Stockholm friends—is there anything fun happening in the next couple of months?

Be kinder than necessary…

A friend wrote on Facebook this morning: “Be kinder than necessary, for everyone you meet is fighting some kind of battle.” This started a discussion about the challenge of being kind in Sweden, and the differences between Swedes and Americans. I am reposting some of my comments here.

Swedes are careful about letting people get too close, and tend to err on the side of caution when it comes to social situations. If a Swede passes someone on the street she thinks she might know but isn’t sure, she’ll most likely not greet the person. The risk of accidentally greeting a stranger and having to deal the the resulting awkwardness is, for the Swede, too daunting.

The darkness in winter plays an important role. To get a close enough look at the person passing on the street, the Swede will have to practically stare at the passerby. There’s not enough light, and people bundle up so much in winter that their distinguishing features are obscured. Rather than straining to look or make eye contact, most Swedes will just look straight ahead and not even glance at the passerby.

A Spaniard on the other hand, would greet the person, stranger or not—and upon accidentally greeting a stranger, would make a new friend.

It probably also has to do with the relatively high cost of offering hospitality in a cold climate. I.e., if you have to work hard during the warm months just to save up enough food and firewood to last you through the winter, then you’ll naturally be more careful about whom you allow into your circle of friends. But once a person is a friend—well then you’ve gotta stick together no matter what, and help each other through the hard times. It takes longer to make friends in Sweden; but my Swedish friends are people I would count on through thick and thin.

I think it’s clear that many of the social customs we observe today evolved out of necessity, arising naturally from the conditions of the existing physical and social environment.

Whether social customs are well suited to the present environment is largely irrelevant because it can take a long time for customs to catch up with changing conditions.

I like American courteousness and consideration, because it acts as a social lubricant, greasing the gears of everyday social interaction. The waitress at the diner may not actually wonder how you’re doing when she asks, but it’s still a nice gesture—and even smalltalk can offer the opportunity to engage in a real conversation. I also recognize that the American friendliness is often superficial, and that it can be hard to make meaningful friendships with some Americans.

I try to combine the best aspects of both the American and Swedish styles, being friendly to strangers, but devoting most of my energy to those few like-minded friends who have reciprocated my friendship and have shown me that they deserve it.

I think most Swedes would benefit from trying to be a bit more open and friendly with others. And as I have long said, Swedes actually like being friendly. They just need an excuse.

Gender identity and ID cards

An article in The Local describes an effort underway in Sweden to offer alternate identity cards to those considering sex-reassignment surgery. The thinking is that those who self-identify as a gender other than their biological gender will be able to present themselves as the person they want to be.

I find this topic fascinating, because it challenges some of our most basic assumptions about what it means to be male or female. People ought to be able to be whoever they want. However, we must also recognize that the presence of people in society who don’t fit into our neat little categories poses some problems.

People like to be able to make assumptions about others. These assumptions save time and offer the illusory comfort that we live in a stable and predictable world. Sometimes though it becomes clear that certain time-honored assumptions are outdated and must be discarded, even at the expense of eliminating this source of comfort and challenging people to abandon their long-held prejudices. Most people today would agree that it is wrong to make assumptions about a person based on the color of her skin. However, it took a long and difficult struggle to get to this point. Along the way, many people were made to feel very uncomfortable, precisely because their assumptions were challenged.

Any time you challenge people’s basic assumptions, you’re going to make them uncomfortable.

One of the most basic assumptions people like to be able to make is that there are only two genders, and that it’s easy to tell who is a man and who is a woman. The presence of transgender people challenges this assumption.

I’ll give one specific example. Imagine a person who is biologically male, but prefers to identify as a woman. Should this person be allowed to share the same public facilities (toilets, changing rooms, etc) as other women? I dare say some erstwhile open minded women might find their open-mindedness challenged upon encountering this situation in real life. And what would be a solution to the problem that would be fair to everyone? I suppose one might suggest that separate facilities for men and women could be outlawed and that the state could enforce unisex facilities. That would eliminate the need to categorize oneself at all, and would be consistent with the trend toward blurring of the boundaries between the sexes. But although fair, that solution too would upset a great number of people, most notably women who like to feel safe in the assumption that their facilities are free of men.

Which assumptions are sacred, and which must be challenged? That’s not an easy question to answer.

A poignantly beautiful day in Stockholm

Today is such a beautiful day that it makes me want to cry. These are the days I live for.

This morning I had coffee out in the sun with freinds at Eriksberg, in a little outdoor garden with purple lilac and chestnut trees. At noon, I walked down to Kungsholmen for lunch with Ayse at an outdoor street café. We ate seafood stew with rice, drank sparkling water, and watched the people walk by. Stockholm is great for people-watching when the sun is shining. After lunch, we walked to a café where we shared a slide of carrot cake and drank caffe lattes. I'm tired from spending a few hours outside in the sunshine. When I got back to Malin's place, I crashed on her couch and dozed for a bit.

Now I'm looking out of her sixth floor window as I rest a bit before catching my flight back to Zürich. This has been a perfect trip. I only wish I could have met more of my friends while I was here. I hope to return for a long weekend in June, and plan to spend two weeks in Sweden at the end of July.

I'm excited about returning to Zürich. The weather there has been even warmer than in Stockholm, and there will surely be opportunities for swimming in the coming days.

I'd like to give a shout-out to my friends Joanna and Malin, who kindly let me crash at their apartments for a few days. It's nice to have such thoughtful and generous friends. I look forward to my next visit!

An undeserved reputation

Sometimes life’s little surprises turn out not to be so surprising after all. A case in point was the surprise that came tonight.

I have a reputation.

While chatting tonight with a woman I consider a good friend, I learned that she has recently heard similar things about me from several women. Apparently, some women in the Stockholm salsa dancing scene have gotten the idea that I’m desperate, that I’m too friendly, and that the only reason I go dancing is to hit on girls.

I wrote that the news was not really surprising. Why? Well, my undeserved reputation probably explains the cold reaction I have gotten from some women.

The timing is ironic. This is because I have in the past year made a conscious effort to be more open and more direct with people, on the theory that honesty and forthrightness are their own reward. Be straight with people and they’ll be straight with you. I’ve made many new friends by letting this side of myself shine. In a way, I’ve become reacquainted with the person I was many years ago, before adolescence. This has made me wonder: kids make new friends so easily, so why isn’t it as easy with adults?

The answer, of course, is that adults often have hidden agendas that they conceal deliberately. I’ve written before about friendliness to strangers and making friends; and it’s obviously more complicated among adults than among children. Most adults with any amount of real-world experience have learned to be a bit suspicious of eagerness.

How suspicious people are, and of whom, depends greatly from person to person and culture to culture. The groups of people who dance salsa in Stockholm perfectly illustrate this. In the Swedish salsa dancing scene, there are basically two types: Swedes and Latinos. The Swedish men who dance salsa are usually more or less like Swedish men in the general public: a bit cold, distant, and yet for the most part egalitarian and respectful of women. Swedish men make good friends once you get to know them, but it's often a mystery how they ever work up the nerve to break the ice. Many Swedish relationships start only after months of friendship, and/or owe their start to the consumption of large quantities of alcohol.

The Latino men on the other hand are the exact opposite of their Swedish counterparts. Latino men are totally upfront, expressing their desires as soon as they feel them. Unfortunately, these men don't seem to know the difference between love and lust, and can therefore sometimes overdo it. I have heard many stories of Latino men expressing their undying love for a woman they just met on the dance floor. These guys are definitely not egalitarian, and are seldom interested in being friends with women. They tend to be macho bordering on misogynistic, and quite often don’t turn out to make good boyfriends to the Swedish women who fall for them.

It's fair to say that with my personality, I fit in somewhere between the serious Swedes and the lusty Latinos.

Realizing this, I decided some time ago to apply my friendly forthrightness not just to new acquaintances and friends, but also to women who caught my eye. If I found a woman attractive, I would be open about it: I’d break the ice and see what happened. If the feeling’s mutual, great; if not, then at least I tried. It’s better to express one’s feelings than to hold them inside. Once they’re out in the open, it’s easier to move on. Or at least that was my theory.

When my friend heard the rumors, she tried explaining to the women who related them to her that I was in fact a decent human being, and that they were mistaking my outgoing and friendly nature for desperation. Her attempt to defend my character was met with skepticism and doubt.

I must admit that even though I’m not truly surprised, I am very disappointed.

I had hoped that by being myself I would allow folks to know the real me. Instead, I’ve given the wrong impression to at least a few people.

Not five minutes after learning the news of my playboy reputation, I received a phone call from a new friend. She and I met a few weeks ago at the salsa congress in Göteborg and learned soon after meeting that we were both interested in photography. I think it's fair to say that we also share very similar world-views. We’d chatted on the phone before and I had enjoyed our conversation. After receiving such disappointing news, I was glad to hear a friendly voice. She and I talked for more than an hour and I shared my thoughts with her:

I face a dilemma. I could try to be more like Swedish men, aloof and distant. Or I could try to be even more like the Latino guys, forward and gregarious. Neither path takes me where I want to go, and each requires unacceptable compromises.

I had no epiphany, but I did reach an important conclusion: In striking a balance between these two paths, I seek to preserve the best qualities of both sides of my personality. I will not forfeit friendliness, playfulness, trust, or respect. These qualities make me the person I am.

Also, I cannot be all things to all people. Some people will always get the wrong idea, no matter what I do. I think I know who these people are, and I guess I’ll just have to back off for a while and keep them at arm’s length. There’s no point in continuing to extend the hand of friendship to someone who sees it as a threat. Maybe a little distance will help them to see me for who I am. If not, well, I can’t please everyone.

Speaking of pleasing everyone... the photos from Göteborg will have to wait another day at least. I needed to get this off my chest tonight.

Swedish wilderness, here I come!

_MAL0006.jpg, originally uploaded by Michael A. Lowry.

I've lived in Sweden for more than seven years but still haven't gone backpacking in the country’s expansive wilderness. That will change soon. On Saturday I got a new tent at REI — a “Mountain 25” tent from The North Face. My mom and dad offered to get the tent for me as an early Christmas present given that I won’t be in the U.S. for the holidays. I set up the tent in the meadow this morning. I think it’ll do just fine. With the rainfly, it’s a 4-season tent. That means I could even go camping in the snow if I were so inclined.

I’m going through all the old camping gear in the garage and trying to scavenge the usable equipment that's reasonably lightweight. Much of the stuff is too heavy for backpacking. When I went camping with the Boy Scouts as a youth, we went to most of our campsites by car, so weight wasn’t a big concern. I thought we had a couple of MSR stoves, but so far I haven’t had any luck in finding them. I also know I’ve got a 4-season sleeping bag hidden somewhere in storage. I’ll hunt for these items more later on in the week.

My plans to buy a car here have been put on hold for two reasons:
1. I don’t have a whole lot of cash at the moment; and
2. I don’t know how best to import a car from the U.S. to Sweden.

Solving problem 1 will just take time. I’m saving my money and trying not to buy things I don’t really need. Regarding the car, I probably should have used the loophole in the law that allows for the tax-free import of a car as an item of one’s personal belongings when one moves to Sweden. Unfortunately, I think it's probably too late for me to take advantage of this. I moved to Sweden in August of 2000.

It seems to be very expensive to import a car directly to Sweden from outside the E.U. The Swedish Custom Service has a web page indicating that one must pay 10% in customs fees on top of 25% in sales tax when importing a car to Sweden from any country outside the E.U. Importing a car from another E.U. country though is tax-free. So I'm thinking I could avoid Sweden’s high import duties and taxes by importing via a third E.U. member state. If anyone has ideas on this, please get in touch.

Saturday morning I’ll catch my flight to Newark and then continue on to Stockholm. I’m excited about returning home, but I’m also sad to leave my family. It has been a real treat to get to know my niece Evelyn a bit, and I regret that I won’t be here to see more of her first year of life.

Right now I’m taking a little lunch break from writing the redbook. I’m a bit behind on the writing, and will probably have to do at least some of the writing after I have returned to Sweden. The book is exciting to write though, an I’m learning a lot about the new version of TWS.

OK, time to grab a quick bite to eat and then get back to work!

Swedish breasts in the news

The story about the young Swedish women fighting for the right to bare their breasts at swimming pools made it to the top three on digg today. As my friend Lisa pointed out, the story's popularity is in agreement with the axiom:

Sweden + breasts = lots of hits.

The movement certainly has a catchy name: Bara Bröst. It's a clever a play on words because it can mean just breasts but also bare breasts. Some of the brave women have begun to document their thoughts and experiences online: KristinK, Bara Badare.

One of the arguments for allowing women to go topless is that men and women should be treated equally, and that if men are allowed to swim without wearing a top, so should women. In a liberal democracy like Sweden, it's hard to argue against equality. The law is pretty clear too: it is illegal to put in place a policy that treats people differently on the basis of their gender.

Some of the activists pushing this agenda have also made the point that people are only upset about seeing breasts because breasts have been sexualized by society and popular culture. These young women would like to foster a society in which people are a bit more desensitized to the sight of breasts in public. I'll agree with this argument.

Swedes are the Puritans of Western Europe.

With respect to how much they cover up, Sweden has moved a lot closer to America in recent years. Women go topless seldom in Sweden, even though there is no law against it. Compared to bathers in Holland, France, Germany, or Italy, Swedish beach-goers are prudes. Where it is customary to go naked, such as in the sauna, there are almost always separate facilities for men and women. The main Swedish television channels show very little nudity. And it's forbidden in Sweden to display a woman's breasts in any advertising (although men's chests are OK for some reason). The argument behind that policy was that women's bodies should not be used to sell things. Women who referred to themselves as feminists were responsible for that law.

So it is gratifying, if a bit surprising, to see Swedish women standing up for the right to show their breasts. It is a fitting tribute to the true spirit of feminism.

What I do find odd is that some of the women involved in fighting for the right to bare their breasts are doing so in the hopes of desexualizing women's bodies. This effort will meet with limited success.

Women's breasts are inherently sexual in nature.

Evolutionary psychologists have argued convincingly that the human female evolved breasts specifically for the purpose of attracting men. The argument goes something like this: when our ancestors began to walk upright, females needed to evolve a means of attracting males that differed from those sexual signals that are useful only among species that walk on all fours. Something showy in the front, perhaps? Yeah, that works. No other primate species displays such a great degree of sexual dimorphism in breast size. No other primate species stores such a large amount of fat in the breasts; this fat doesn't seem to be needed to for strictly functional purposes, and is there whether or not the woman is nursing. The human female's unique breasts are a primary sexual trait of her gender. Along with other attractive traits like curvaceous hips, clear skin, and symmetrical faces, men are going to find breasts attractive.

That said, I think over-sexualization and over-sensationalization of the human body is damaging too. Forcing women to cover their breasts in a way draws more attention to them. What is customarily hidden from view will naturally be all the more intriguing for its scarcity. In Victorian England, even the sight of a woman's ankle was considered scandalously provocative. Obviously things are a bit more relaxed today, but we still have our own form of Puritanism; we've only moved the line a bit between what's no big deal and what's scandalous. Imposing the most conservative standards of modesty on everyone doesn't make sense, but that's what we'd have to do to please anyone who might be offended. Prudishness is not just a harmless bit of cultural baggage though. It is psychologically demeaning to people, because ultimately, it aims to convince them that they should be ashamed of their own bodies. I find it much more offensive that some people believe it's their duty to impose their prudishness on others.

Although women are no doubt sexual creatures, it is surely frustrating for some women who feel that their value is diminished by right of the fact that some men view them primarily as objects of sexual desire. However, the respect these women seek cannot be codified into law. Prohibiting bare breasts in advertising, for example, will not cause men to stop finding women (or their breasts) desirable. Nor is this what most reasonable women want. What they want is to be seen as whole people, with more to offer the world than just their bodies. Of course we are animals, but we are also uniquely capable of rising above our baser instincts. The way to do this is not to deny these instincts, but to accept them — both the strengths and the weaknesses. So the solution is not to deny that breasts (or hips, or whatever) are sexual in nature; but to accept the fact, and move on. Respect doesn't mean ceasing to be a sexual creature. Respect means caring about others and taking their views into account. What seems like flattery to one person might be insulting to another though, so one size definitely does not fit all.

I've been to nude beaches in France and to nude bathhouses in Germany. I've also seen the many Muslim women in Sweden who out of modesty chose to wear the veil or burka when in public. It's clear that there is a great deal of variability in cultural standards when it comes to what parts of their bodies people are comfortable showing in public. The world is full of people who accept without question their own particular prejudices and reject with equally unquestioning moral indignation the differing views of others. Prudishness with regard to nakedness is a good example of this sort of fundamentalism. When people of different cultures come together in the same bathhouse, you can imagine that not everyone is going to be completely comfortable with the clothing choices made by everyone else. It can be a challenge to make rules that foster an environment in which most people can feel comfortable.

It's also often the case that some people will have to be made uncomfortable, at least for a while, in order to bring about a justified change. The end of racial segregation in the U.S. was just such a period of uncomfortable transition. Changes that grant new freedoms to one group of people inevitably impose some uneasiness in other groups of people. So it is with topless women in Swedish bathhouses.

The women swimming topless in Swedish bathhouses are evidently willing to make some of their fellow bathers uncomfortable in the name of exercising their freedoms. I wonder if they would also support allowing men and women to bathe naked. Or would that make them uncomfortable?

Okay to do it, but a crime to take photos

Sometimes I'm proud to be an American. Other times, not so much. After reading about two Florida teenagers convicted of child pornography offenses, I had to shake my head in disbelief.

Two teens, aged 16 and 17, took racy photos of themselved having a bit of fun. The photos somehow found their way to the police (by way, perhaps, of their overzealous parents). The two teens were prosecuted for, and convicted of, creating child pornography.  The 'children' in question? The two teens themselves. The law was used to punish the very people it was meant to protect. This is a crystal-clear example of how zealots in law enforcement and the justice system abuse the legal system to promote their narrow Puritanical world-view.

In Florida, it's perfectly legal for two people the ages of these two teens to have sex. This means that it's okay for teens to have sex, but it's a crime if they document it. This ridiculous situation arises out of the vast divide between how the law is written and how the real world actually works. People past the age of puberty are going to have sex. That's just a fact of life, and there's no point in trying to fight it. Denying that teens will have sex is like sticking one's head in the sand. Denial is not a basis for sound public policy.

The law seems to have been written based on the assumtions of a world before the arrival of the internet and digital cameras. These outdated assumptions no longer hold, and for this reason alone, the law is is poorly suited to the real world conditions today.

There was a time not too long ago when it wasn't possible to take intimate photos without exposing them at least to the staff of the local photo development lab. This no doubt discouraged many who might have otherwise liked to take racy photos from doing so. But with digital cameras, people can take private photos without having to rely on a stranger to develop them. Millions of people are taking photos today that they wouldn't have considered taking a few years ago.

When the photos are on a computer, it's also easier than ever for people to share them. In the case in question, the two teens emailed the photos from one of their email accounts to another, and did not appear to intend to share them with anyone else. But of course other people might chose to share similar photos with their friends, or even with strangers. 

The judge writing the majority opinion in the case explained his descision by claiming that the teens could have sold the photos. To me it seems silly to punish someone because something he created could potentially be abused. If it's selling of the photos that the judge wishes to punish, then why punish the teens? Why not instead punish any eventual act of selling the photographs?

The judge also claimed that the very existence of the photos could cause shame and psychological trauma to the teens involved, and that they lacked the maturity and wisdom to understand the consequences of their actions. If the photos were to be disseminated, the judge argued, then it could cause irreparable harm to the teens' future lives and careers. It seems to me that the act of prosecuting the teens, and dragging them through a lengthy and expensive court battle, causes much more damage than the original photos could possibly cause. First of all, if public attention is something that is inherently damaging and shameful, then drawing more attention upon the matter cannot help.

Secondly, there is no objective standard for judging things like psychological trauma. Yes, it's possible that the photos might cause embarrasment to the teens. But how much of this is due to the photos themselves, and how much is due to the people telling the teens how they ought to be ashamed of themselves? The Puritanical anti-sex fundamentalists would have us believe that sex dirties all things it touches. What if the teens fully appreciated what they were doing and were not ashamed? What if they were proud to be a couple, and just wanted to memorialize their expressions of affection for one another? What interest does the state have in telling them they should be ashamed or that they should feel traumatized?

Thirdly, as with some other crimes, (like casual use of marijuana) it is hard to see who the victim of the crime is. Yes, the law sometimes has to protect people from their own lack of judgement. But this time, the law punishes the very people it is supposed to protect. It's hard to see the value in the whole exercise when it is the law itself that is the source of the majority of negative consequences brought upon those prosecuted under it. The very act of criminalizing something brings with it significant costs. In this case, the costs are hard to justify.

Most governments have equally lofty goals, but how they go about reaching those goals varies a lot from place to place. Living in Sweden for more than seven years has given me some valuable insights into how governments attempt to accomplish their goals. In Sweden, people are often treated as though they are all children. I'm a fiercely individualistic person, so it's ever more difficult for me to have understanding for the sort of thinking that says people have to be protected from themselves. Sweden is also fond of punishing the many for the sins of the few. The high taxes on alcohol are a good example of this. A libertarian at heart, I have a hard time understanding the argument that it's a good idea to criminalize xyz just because xyz could have negative consequences.

But America isn't perfect either. It's painful for me to watch as millions of American youth are taught to be ashamed of sex. Remember the judge's quip about psychological trauma? Well, repression of sex causes more psychological trauma than does sex. And nevermind psychological damage. What about objective measures of how well a country is preparing its youth for responsible sexuality? Just look at the rates of teen pregnancy of sexually-tranmitted diseases in the U.S., and compare them to the same figures for just about any other industrialized nation. Repression also gives rise to perversion. Just look at Japan: here's a state where sexuality is strictly controlled, and it is this very repression (combined with a culture of extreme patriarchy) that has given rise to some of the most degrading pornography in the world. Sexual repression causes much more harm than good.

So how do we fix it? For one thing, parents have to stop living in denial. As soon as their children hit puberty, they're going to start getting interested in sex. There's no point in pretending that this isn't the case. Our children deserve love and respect, and we can't give this to them by pretending they are asexual creatures. Parents should teach their children about sex not only so that they can make good decsions for themselves, but also so that they can understand and respect the views of others. Parents need to teach boys especially to respect girls as more than mere objects of desire.

But also, the law needs to grow up with the rest of the nation. Laws that draw a bright line between child and adult are blunt instruments applied to delicate problems. The real world is complicated, and there are gray areas. For one thing, teenagers are sexual creatures and there's no point in trying to criminalize teenage sexuality. Laws intended to protect children from being taken advantage of sexually are often ill-applied to older teenagers. Age-of-consent and child pornography laws should be updated to allow for the fact that different people mature at different ages, and that physical and emotional maturity arrive at different times in different people.

The law should concentrate on punishing those who commit actual abuse, such as those who use their position of authority to take advantage of youth. In Sweden, for example, the difference in age between the two people makes a difference to whether sexual relations between them can be considered statutory rape, as does whether the older person is in a position of authority. This is the sort of flexibility needed to make the law appropriate for situations in the real world.

Making friends, judging character, and trusting oneself

Anyone who has met me knows I'm a friendly person. However, I haven't always had many friends. When I lived in Austin, I had only a few very close friends. And more recently, when Lotta and I split up a few years ago, I realized that most of my friends were people I knew through her. I didn't have very many friends of my own here in Sweden.

As a sort of declaration of my own independence, and of my determination to remain in Sweden, I set about making a real effort to meet new people and make new friends of my own. I took up salsa dancing. I picked up rock climbing again after many years away from the sport. I got to know some of my colleagues better. And I even met total strangers on the subway or on the internet.

Making friends is a skill. It requires a bit of finesse, especially with Swedes, who can be tough nuts to crack. In Stockholm, most people's circle of friends consists of people they met in school and people they know through work. It can be a real challenge to break into this circle even if you have a lot in common with someone. Sometimes it almost feels like you have to have gone to the same high school as a person to be considered that person's friend. I moved to Sweden in my late 20s, so I didn't have that opportunity. If I went back to university, I'm sure I'd meet a lot of nice people that way.

So yes, Swedes are picky when it comes to choosing friends. But they're also quite aloof and distant at times, so it can be a real challenge to break the ice and start a conversation with them. I have discovered that I have an advantage in this area: English is my native tongue.

When I introduce myself to a stranger here in Stockholm and start the conversation in English, I get a more positive reaction than a Swede who tried the same thing in Swedish would receive. It's partly that Swedes like to be courteous to strangers, and they enjoy every opportunity to practice speaking in English. But there's more to it than that.

Swedes need an excuse to be friendly.

Their default attitude is one of cold detachment, and they require a good reason to step out of this pattern. The excuse can be almost anything, but here are some examples I've observed:

• having a shared interest or shared situation — like most people, Swedes are more friendly to a stranger if they feel that they have something in common with him or her. But random circumstance is often the only commonality necessary. For example, sharing the same subway car with an annoying drunk gives the other passengers a sense of shared adversity, and hence a reason to empathize with one another.
• being on holiday or being in another country — Swedes outside their hometown are more relaxed. Swedes outside of Sweden are completely transformed. It's as though the cold demeanor in Sweden is kept in place by the collective assumption that everyone else expects one to behave in that way. Swedes seem to fear that acting in a different way would be looked down upon by their peers.
• being drunk — It never ceases to amaze me how uptight Swedes lighten up after a few drinks. Normally quiet and reserved, after a few pints of beer or glasses of wine, many Swedes are gregarious and cheerful.
• having a foreigner present — this is the excuse that I take advantage of. It's said "when in Rome, do as the Romans do." For Swedes, having a Roman around is good enough. If in a group of Swedes there is one foreigner, and especially if he or she is an English-speaking Westerner, the Swedes will switch to English and many of them will be friendlier than they would otherwise be. It's partly that they want to put on their best face and act as good ambassadors for Sweden; but it's more than that. They honestly feel more relaxed when a non-Swede is present.

When I realized that I had an advantage as an American and a native English-speaker, I stopped introducing myself in Swedish. Now when I meet people for the first time, I speak English. I let them know soon after meeting them that I also understand Swedish; but I often continue to speak English even if they then switch to Swedish. It's ironic that not speaking the local language has advantages. But of course a foreigner who didn't speak English wouldn't notice these advantages.

I've made lots of friends in the past few years, and I only recently began to realize how many. A while ago I joined Facebook, a social networking site originally open only to U.S. college students. Nowadays anyone can join, and in recent months many of my friends here in Sweden have joined. Facebook has turned into a way of keeping track of all the people I know. I now have almost 250 friends on Facebook, and I add more almost every day. I have started to use Facebook to make new friends too. After I meet a person once or twice, I will add him or her to my friends list so that we can keep in touch. For many of these people, we don't correspond much (or at all) directly with each other, but we can still see what the other is up to by looking at the news-feed every day. In a very real way, Facebook has come to fill a roll once played by the town square: it's a place where people can bump into one another, where they can just sit and people-watch, and where opportunities abound for networking and making new friends.

Already, I have made several new friends using Facebook. In some cases these were friends of people I already had in my friends list. In fact, I have found a few people who knew several of my friends of mine, but whom I did not know yet. I figured that if they were friends with several folks I already knew, then they might be people worth getting to know. I've also made friends there just by random chance. I have struck up email conversations with a few complete strangers on Facebook, and learned that the way a person responds to my style of friendliness depends a lot on the person.

Several folks were eager to add me as friends after one or two emails. Others added me right away after seeing that we share a common interest or learning that we have a mutual friend. Still others have preferred to keep their distance a bit, corresponding by email for a while or meeting in person a few times, and then adding me to their friends list only after we had established a rapport.

Then there was one woman who seemed nice in the beginning, but turned cold soon after. After a very brief email exchange, I added her to my friends list on the strength of our shared interests. She didn't reply directly, but instead posted the following status message to her public profile:
"...is wondering why people think it's a good idea to send friend requests to complete strangers."
Even for a Swede, that sort of reaction seems petty and fearful. But of course I don't know what sorts of experiences this person has had in the past, so I probably shouldn't be too quick to judge. When I told the story to a friend, she said "you are much more honest than most people which is confusing."

Honesty is confusing? I find honesty refreshing. However, I suppose Facebook is in this regard not too different from real life. There are a lot of dishonest people out there, and it's probably hard to tell what a person is really like without a face-to-face meeting. As Forest Gump's momma used to say, "Life is like a box of chocolates. You never know what you're going to get." Absent first-hand experience, people tend to draw on their past experiences. For many, this means assuming the best about people; but for some, experience has taught them to fear the worst. The vast majority of my experiences with people have been positive, and this no doubt had led me to tend to give people the benefit of the doubt.

This brings me to something I've been thinking a lot about lately. With each new person I meet and each new friend I make, I gain valuable experience in filtering out the stuff on the surface and seeing the real person underneath. As a result, I am a much better judge of character now than I was just a few years ago. At first, I didn't realize how good a judge of character I was, because I too was easily distracted by irrelevant superficialities. But I've grown to understand that when I trust my instincts about a person, I'm almost always right about that person.

A case in point is a good friend I met about a year ago. She and I met quite randomly, but struck up an intense conversation almost immediately upon meeting. I knew after about a minute that she was the sort of person I could really like: friendly, intelligent, and forthright. I didn't know at the time that we would actually become such close friends; but my instincts were right on the money.

I have ignored my instincts in the past, and paid the price for it later.

Looking back over my life, I see that I have tended to second-guess and over-analyze in precisely those times when I was unhappy or troubled. When I am happy and confident, I tend to trust my own gut feelings more. Intuition is a powerful tool that can save a lot of time and energy. I'm learning to trust my instincts. What feels right usually is right, even if it's not immediately apparent why.

I asked a question of my friends recently: "What is the most important thing you have learned about people?" The answers are as varied as the people who gave them. I'll close by paraphrasing a few of them:
"Nobody's perfect."
"Don't trust anyone."
"People are often nicer than they try to appear."
"Your first impression is usually correct but you sometimes have to change your opinion about someone. Try to give everyone a chance."

Swedish National Day 2007

The Sixth of June is the National Day of Sweden, so like a good patriot of my adopted home, I hung my Swedish flag from the railing of my balcony this morning. I'm the only one in the neighborhood to have done this.

Swedes aren't terribly patriotic, and unfortunately patriotism here is sometimes associated with nationalism, racism or worse. Leave to to moderate, introspective Sweden to question the value of loving one’s own country!

I believe one should be proud of one’s land and be embrace what's good about it. No country on Earth is perfect, just as no person is perfect. We do what we can with what we're given, each to this best of his abilities.

I love my adopted home Sweden in a different way from the way I love my fatherland The United States, and part of the distinction has to do with the way I obtained citizenship in each country.

I was born in the U.S., so I didn't have to work for U.S. citizenship; it was just given to me. But I chose Sweden, and to become I Swede, I had to put in a lot of work and invest more than five years of my life. In a way, it feels like my Swedish citizenship is the one I earned.

This afternoon, I will attend a special citizen ceremony for naturalized Swedes who were granted citizenship during 2006. Because I live in the small municipality of Solna, I will attend the ceremony for Solna residents, which will be held at Confidencen, a small theater on the grounds of Ulriksdal Palace, just fifteen minute’s walk from my home. Were I to live in Stockholm proper, I would attend the ceremony at Stockholm's landmark city hall, where the Nobel Prize ceremony is held each December 10^th.



The ceremony will consist of musical entertainment, a speech, the handing-out of welcome notices to new citizens, and then the singing of the Swedish National Song, Du gamla, Du fria. I spent a while last night making sure I knew the words by heart. Now my only problem will be making it through both verses without choking up. I'm a sentimental guy, and the song is quite moving.

Åsa and Patric will accompany me and take photos. After the ceremony, a snack of some kind will be served (perhaps with a drink — the invitation doesn't say). Just in case, I have a bottle of chilled champagne and a set of hand-blown Orrefors flutes I've never used; so a celebratory drink will be in order.

In a bit less than month, it will be time to celebrate my other national day, the Fourth of July. I'm planning to have a cookout with friends on that day, and to serve my world-famous hamburgers.

For the curious, here's a bit more information about the national emblems of Sweden, including a link to a good recording of the national anthem. And for a bit of history, here's a link to blog entry I made on this day last year.

MS Wireless Gaming Receiver

MS Wireless Gaming Receiver, originally uploaded by Michael A. Lowry.

I had a meeting at Kista Entré this afternoon, and did a bit of shopping in Kista Galleria afterward. After having no luck at two shops devoted to video games, I found this little gem at On Off, a big electronics chain similar to Best Buy.

It's Microsoft's Xbox 360 Wireless Gaming Receiver for Windows. It allows one to use a wireless Xbox 360 controller with a PC. I'm planning to use it with the controller Kelly gave me as a birthday gift last year. Now I just need to wait until Mac OS X drivers for the device become available.

In the U.S., the receiver can be found for as little as $16. I paid 250 SEK for mine, roughly equivalent to $36 — more than twice the price of the same thing in the U.S.

Typical.

Oh well. At least I have it now.

Analyzing Systembolaget's Little Monopoly Analysis

For my non-Swedish audience, a little background information might be in order: Systembolaget is the state-owned company that has a monopoly on private retail sales of alcoholic beverages in Sweden. The debate over whether the monopoly is a good idea has been going on in Sweden ever since the first days of Systembolaget, when the system was developed as a temperate alternative to outright prohibition. In recent times though, Systembolaget itself has largely remained outside of the political debate, prefering instead to do the job with which it was entrusted and to do this job well. The company would frequently offer public service messages about the importance of responsible drinking and so on, but for the most part, it did not play politics.

Well, that was then; this is now.

Systembolaget now finds itselt under threat from within and without. First, public support for the aging monopoly has been waning in recent years. Second, the existence of the state-supported monopoly may violate European law. Systembolaget has probably never been in as grave jeopardy as it is now. Responding to the perceived threat, Systembolaget has now gone on the offensive.

In recent days, Systembolaget launched a campaign to attempt to bolster public support for the monopoly in a time-honored Swedish way: by treating Swedes like children.

The new television ads ask viewers to take "Systembolagets Lilla Monopolanalys" either online or by telephone. "Answer a brief questionnaire," the ads tell viewers, "to find out whether you support the alcohol monopoly or not."

Most people know where they stand on the issue without getting help from the monopoly-holder itself. I went online and answered the five questions. The only way to answer the questions is by selecting a number on a scale of 1 to 5. The labels at the ends of the scale vary from one question to the next but the same simple 1-5 scale is used for all five questions. Three of the questions begin with an introductory statement suggesting the "right" answer. Below I have translated all five questions. The introductory text is in italics.

1. How important is it be for you to be able to puchase beer, wine, and spririts in your grocery store?
   1=not important at all, 5=very important
   
2. One of the ideas behind having an alcohol monopoly is that alcohol is sold in a more restrained way, so that people don't buy more than they had intended to.
   Do you think it would be good or bad if there were volume discounts and other special offers on alcohol?
   1=very bad, 5=very good
   
3. Another consequence of selling alcohol without a profit motive is that it's possible to offer a wide selection of, for example, wine in various price classes.
   How important is it to you to be able to find many varieties of beer, wine, and spirits to choose from in the same store?
   1=not important at all, 5=very important
   
4. Is it important to you that alcohol is sold only with careful ID checks, so that it's difficult for teenagers to buy alcohol?
   1=not important at all, 5=very important
   
5. According to a report from the Public Health Insittute, alcohol consumption would increase by an amount equivalent to 3.5 liters of vodka per Swede per year if the monopoly were taken away today.
   Are you worred that alcohol consumption would increase in Sweden?
   1=not at all worried, 5=very worried
   

When I had completed the questionnaire, I provided a telephone number for a call back from the recorded, packaged voice of Anitra Steen, general manager of Systembolaget. The call came about 5 minutes later. Her summary of my answers and her view of their meaning was so blatantly condescending and patronizing as to be almost laughable.

Anyone with a 4th-grade education can see that the questions and the introductions are worded in such a way as to lead the reader toward a particular answer. But the problems don't end with leading questions. The questions are also phrased in such a way as to ask the respondent to make a false choice. Many viable alternatives are not provided. These questions are a lot like Stephen Colbert's oft-repeated question:
"George W. Bush: great president, or the greatest president?"
As Malin pointed out, they're also a lot like another time-honored example:
"Have you stopped beating your wife? Yes or no?"

Frustrated by the experience, I wrote a nice long letter to Systembolaget's customer service folks and pointed out the problems with their "analysis." I received a curt but polite "thanks for your feedback" reply but no substantive response to the problems I pointed out.

Here are some of the "facts" stated and implied in the questions and the subsequent "analysis," plus a word or two about why they're fallacious:
Fact 1. The only way to get rid of the Systembolaget is whole-hog. If you get rid of the monopoly, you have to allow alcohol sales everywhere: ICA, Konsum, Hemköp, 7-11, ice-cream trucks, and toy stores.
Why it ain't so: It's also possible to do something like Colorado and Texas, where beer and wine are available at grocery stores, but strong types of alcohol may be obtained only at state-licensed liquor stores.
Fact 2. It's the state's job to protect people from their own excesses. One way the state can accomplish this is by making it cumbersome to purchase alcohol.
Why it ain't so: People are responsible for their own actions. It's only when someone begins to infringe on the liberties of others that it's the state's job to step in.
Fact 3. A company can offer a wide selection of goods only if it has no profit motive (i.e., a state-sponsored monopoly).
Why it ain't so: Yeah, like "Would you prefer a light gray or dark gray Trabant?" Consumer demand will ensure that popular goods are stocked. If customers demand it, merchants will supply it. And for rarer, less popular items there are always specialty shops and Internet shops. When it comes to variety, heck, the Central Market on Lamar Boulevard in Austin has a broader selection of beer and wine than any Systembolaget I've been to. Do you think they have trouble turning a profit?
Fact 4. The only way to enfoce ID checks for alcohol purchases is a state-sponsored monopoly.
Why it ain't so: Where do these people come from? Why not just enforce existing laws and dole out harsher punishments for law-breakers?
Fact 5. If Sweden did away with the alcohol monopoly, it would have to do abbruptly; Swedes couldn't handle cheap alcohol and society would collapse.
Why it ain't so: First of all, it doesn't have to be done overnight. The monopoly could be eliminated bit by bit, in phases. This would give folks a chance to get used to the changes. Secondly, people aren't stupid. They learn and adapt to new situations. Even heavy-drinking Swedes will realize their limits.

The last one deserves a bit more attention: Limiting availability of alcohol only increases its mystique and allure. Incidentally, this is the same thing that happens when one raises the taxes on alcohol. If the taxes were also lowered, Swedes would gradually adapt and drink less. Once the perceived value of the substance falls to meet the actual production value, people cease to be as fascinated by it. In countries like France and Spain where alcohol is much less expensive, people drink moderately during the week rather than binge drinking on the weekends. A beer or wine with one's meal on Tuesday is certainly better for one's health than a string of cocktails at a bar on Saturday night. But most Swedes don't drink in a moderate, everyday way because they think it's too expensive. Drink is something to be reserved for special, no-holds-barred occasions. Why do Swedes go nuts when they're vacationing in the Mediterranean? Because they've only a short time to booze it up before returning to exorbitant Sweden. Swedes will adapt.

When I first visited Systembolaget's web page to find the "monopolanalys," I half-expected to find questions to spark debate, pique interest, and raise alternative points of view from both sides of the table. Instead, I found self-serving propaganda that seems to be based on the assumption that Swedes are ignorant and impressionable juveniles.

But I know that Swedes are smart; they can take care of themselves, and they see right through this sort of crap.

Systembolaget, get out of the propaganda game. You're not politicians, so don't play like it.

Swedish passport due tomorrow

Tomorrow moring I shall return to the police station on Kungsholmen to pick up my new Swedish passport. Pursuant to the new regulations, passports must be picked up in person by the passport holder.

Aside from my aforementioned excitment about having tangiable proof of Swedish citizenship, I am also eager to see if the photo in my passport looks any better than the one on my Swedish drivers license. :)

I will use the new passport for the first time when I travel to the U.S. in a few weeks. I will go to Austin for an assigment for IBM.

Now that I have two citizenships, I'll have to investigate the proper procedures for travelling with two passports. I have several unanswered questions, including:

1. Am I allowed to leave Sweden using my Swedish passport, and enter the United States using my U.S. passport?
2. If so, must I use the U.S. passport to leave the U.S. again and use the Swedish passport to re-enter Sweden?

If I can use the passport of the country I'm enterering or leaving, it will mean standing in shorter queues.

It's actually a good thing that I am getting a new passport. My U.S. passport has no more places for entry & exit stamps. One of these days I need to swing by the U.S. embassy and have some more pages inserted into my U.S. passport.