Let me first say thank you for continuing your cover on this issue. If we are to break the money-media-machiavelist strangelhold on the public debate, then coverage of social movements is crucial.

It is very interesting to see the difference between Britain and Sweden. Here the feminist discourse is dominated by academic feminists, where the younger generations are mostly intersectionalists. The Feminist Initiative that ran in the 2006 elections got a lot of bad press, and quite some was due to the dominance of "strange people". Then again a lot of press was due to very public in-fighting between the older guard wanting a essentially a strong second generation feminist program (that which was not achieved in the 60ies and 70ies) and the younger crowd wanted a third generation feminist program with a clear intersectionalist agenda.

As an example, one of the many clashes was over the name law, the younger wanted to repeal the paragraphs demanding of gender-seperation of names (you can not give a boy a female name and vice versa, though there is of course gender neutral names). The older thought it was silly and detrimental. Another was over household services where the older (and richer) gen leaned right and wanted tax deductions for professional cleaning while the younger (and poorer) leaned left and wanted shorter normal workdays.

Though the conflict illustrated the schism between the generations, in the end I also suspect it marked the transfer of the role as dominant interpreters of feminism in the public from the 2nd gen to the 3rd gen. And in the 3rd gen T is seen as a natural part of the struggle.

Lesbians and gay men, as she sees, have no common battles to fight.

This I would say is where the conflict can be found within the swedish letter-combination movement. Or rather between gay men and the rest.

Sweden's finest (and perhaps only) collaborative, leftist e-newspaper Synapze.se