A memorial demonstration for Fadime Şahindal, who died in 2002 in a high-profile honor-related murder.
When I started teaching in Sweden we were using what we call LGR11 (Läroplan och kursplanen, 2011), as our state curriculum as mandated by the Swedish National Agency for Education (Skolverket). From this curriculum, I learned which values the Swedish government considers most important to teach its citizens.
Human rights. Democracy. Children’s rights. Respect for people as individuals. Respect for the environment. The safety of individuals, not just physically, but also mentally. Equality of the sexes. The innate value of each human. Generosity, tolerance, and responsibility. The active involvement of school personnel to actively speak up and stand against discrimination and bully behavior.
Then, last year, came LGR22, an updated curriculum.
It hasn’t changed much and the values I’ve listed are still there.
But the Swedish government has become a lot more specific, listing that honor-related violence and oppression must be prevented and confronted with education. They mention that students should be taught to critically analyze power dynamics that could lead to honor-related oppression.
In addition, it states that students should be taught to respect other people's right to their lives and that we should teach students how to stand up against abuse (of any kind). They want students to be aware of –and practice – the social norms of Swedish culture.
Why this increased focus?
Immigration is a hot-button issue in many countries and it is a driving force in the current political climate in Sweden.
Think about the sentence you just read.Think about all of the sentences you read prior to this. Immigration. Honor killings. Who comes to mind for you?
I'm going to bet you aren’t thinking about your Finnish or Norwegian neighbor. Perhaps your American one. But mostly you’re probably thinking south Asian, Middle Eastern, African, Muslim, and/or brown people.
When I first went over the new curriculum, my gut reaction was shock. It felt as if the Swedish government, in highlighting this specific bit of mostly rural culture, is leaning into the idea that immigration (that kind of immigration) is bad for Sweden.
But then I sat with it for a while.
And it felt like it made sense. We have to uphold and teach human rights. In Sweden, that partly means that children have rights and that the sexes are equal. Since honor crimes are typically against girls and women, it’s important that we bring it out into the light. That we stand up and support these females who feel abused by any society that includes honor-based violence.
I thought about my students who might be in a situation such as this. I considered that explicitly standing up against this specific type of violence might send a message to them. One in which they see and understand that there are other ways to exist in this life.
Then I thought of the girls who are afraid, every single day, of being deported. What good is it that we point out this injustice if our government works to deny them the possibility of this existence?
“Here is a better way to live. Now go back to your own country.”
That makes no sense as an approach.
I don’t know what the initial motivation was to include these new points in our curriculum, but I’d like to think it was because the government wanted to support females who might find themselves in such a tragic situation. That the goal was to help. Not to harm.
I have to believe that. Because the Sweden I fell in love with helps children.
The Sweden I fell in love with shines a light on the rights of humans.
All humans. Right?
This is a column and the views are the author's own.