Feministiskt självförsvar - för eller emot?

The aim of this thesis is to discuss and analyse the media debate about feminist self-defence, by pointing out the pros and the cons. The arguments in favour could be separated into three different parts: statistical arguments, psychological arguments and justice arguments. The counter arguments could also be separated into three parts: general arguments, violence-related arguments and gender-related arguments. In short, feminist self-defence is built on women's experiences of men's violence. It contains three different parts to help women avoid violence, threat of violence, insult and sexual harassment. These parts are mental, verbal and physical. The second aim of the thesis is to point out that feminist theories differ from one another. They have one thing in common: to make women's lives better. But to achieve this goal, the feminist theories have different ways to go. In this thesis I will exemplify this by analysing the arguments in the media debate about feminist self-defence from two different feminist theories: liberal feminism and radical feminism. From these different points of view, the arguments that surround feminist self-defence could be both justified and criticized