gender differential paper IJCRB

ijcrb.webs.com
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
JUNE 2011
VOL 3, NO 2
be understood as aiming towards assimilation, something that does not seem to be consistent
with the actual findings of the study.
As seen in the discussion above, the question of whether Denmark favours assimilation or
integration is not entirely clear. This corresponds with the findings of the Eurobarometer (2000)
which describes Denmark as a “polarised country” (p. 25) in which a large part of the population
is intolerant towards minority groups but at the same time it has one of the largest percentages of
actively tolerant people inside the EU. Furthermore, the study describes the Danes as rather open
towards foreigners in comparison to other EU countries. According to Hedetoft (2006b), the
main strategy in political and social practice is assimilation. However, according to the
Eurobarometer (2000) the majority of the Danish population does not expect foreigners to give
up their own culture, except “those aspects of their cultural life that violate domestic legislation”
(p. 48). Hedetoft (2006b) also admits that, besides these assimilationist practices, there is a new
discourse on integration and diversity. While the assimilationist strategy is broadly accepted by
several political parties, it is mainly supported by the Danish Peoples Party (Hedetoft 2006b), a
party known for its anti immigration attitude (Bjørklund and Andersen 1999). Some other
political parties are starting to foster a diversity discourse; however, with a mentality to take
advantage of diversity and the different backgrounds foreigners bring to Denmark. (Hedetoft
2006b).
Lassen (2009) differentiates the political and media discourse from the reality on the Danish
labour market. According to him, there seem to be two realities when talking about integration in
Denmark:
1. Integration in Denmark is a big problem
2. Integration in Denmark is a big success
The first reality refers to the media and political reality which is focusing on problems in the
different cultural and religious backgrounds of foreigners in Denmark. The second reality,
however, refers to the ongoing success in integrating immigrants into the labour market and the
educational system. (Lassen 2009) According to Lassen (2009), the difference in these two
realities stems from different attitudes towards immigrants. The public discussion is challenging
immigrants to become like Danes and if they do not, integration failed. On the other hand Danish
companies seem to be welcoming immigrants as they are, figuring out a way how they can work
together in the future. In Lassen’s argumentation it shows that the Danish media seems to have a
strong influence on the public opinion about integration. Gudykunst and Kim (2003) might agree
as they suggest that mass media can have a strong influence on the host society’s attitude
towards a certain cultural group or foreigners in general. According to Lassen’s (2009) two
realities, it seems that Denmark is not necessarily as focused on homogeneity and assimilation as
the media and political discussions often try to communicate. Hence, when looking at the
situation for foreigners in Denmark it seems crucial to always remember what reality one is
looking at. Regarding the three main columns of the integration law mentioned above, Denmark
seems to have made big steps in achieving the first two points, job and education. In order to
fulfil the third point, integration into society, Denmark is working on different projects, for
instance in cooperation with NGOs. Moreover, there are awards and projects around the issue of
COPY RIGHT © 2011 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research 290